RSPG vs. USNG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. RSPG is passively managed, while USNG is actively managed. Over the past year, RSPG returned 34.94% vs 47.43% for USNG. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RSPG charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.

Performance

RSPG vs. USNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPG achieves a 25.57% return, which is significantly lower than USNG's 36.17% return.

RSPG

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: -7.91%
• YTD: 25.57%
• 6M: 25.75%
• 1Y: 34.94%
• 3Y*: 17.99%
• 5Y*: 19.92%
• 10Y*: 8.92%

USNG

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: -0.64%
• YTD: 36.17%
• 6M: 36.35%
• 1Y: 47.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSPG vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	25.57%	8.88%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	36.17%	10.51%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPG and USNG is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025	0.47

RSPG vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPG	USNG
Energy	100.0%	79.2%
Financial Services	0.0%	1.8%
Basic Materials	-	1.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	12.8%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	4.7%

Return for Risk

RSPG vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RSPG

RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 48
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 43
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 47

USNG

USNG Risk / Return Rank: 91
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 86
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 93

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

RSPG vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	RSPG	USNG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	2.86	-1.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	3.85	-1.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.48	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	6.99	-4.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.56	21.05	-13.48

RSPG vs. USNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPG Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is lower than the USNG Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPG and USNG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RSPG vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPG drawdown since its inception was -79.98%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -6.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPG and USNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPG	USNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.98%	-6.82%	-73.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.72%	-6.82%	-6.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.44%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-73.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.78%	-0.64%	-11.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.42%	-1.52%	-23.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.63%	2.26%	+2.37%

Volatility

RSPG vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a higher volatility of 7.22% compared to Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) at 6.29%. This indicates that RSPG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPG	USNG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.22%	6.29%	+0.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.83%	12.47%	+4.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.09%	16.68%	+5.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.25%	16.61%	+11.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.53%	16.61%	+16.92%

RSPG vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPG vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison

RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, more than USNG's 1.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	2.11%	2.60%	2.43%	2.84%	3.43%	2.37%	3.15%	2.15%	2.18%	2.55%	1.14%	2.80%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	1.09%	1.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSPG and USNG in my portfolio?

RSPG and USNG have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSPG or USNG?

RSPG has higher volatility (7.22%) compared to USNG (6.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPG dropped -79.98% vs USNG's -6.82%.

Which ETF is better, RSPG or USNG?

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 47.43% vs 34.94% for RSPG. On fees, RSPG is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, USNG has been the lower-risk option at 6.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPG or USNG?

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 47.43% return vs 34.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPG or USNG?

RSPG is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for USNG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSPG or USNG?

RSPG has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 1.09% for USNG.

What is the main difference between RSPG and USNG?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPG and 0.59% for USNG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 1.61), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.