PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RSPG vs. XMMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RSPG vs. XMMO - 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 Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPG achieves a 34.27% return, which is significantly higher than XMMO's 23.73% return. Over the past 10 years, RSPG has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of 9.73%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.73% annualized return.


RSPG

1D
1.25%
1M
-2.65%
YTD
34.27%
6M
28.95%
1Y
47.49%
3Y*
19.93%
5Y*
21.10%
10Y*
9.73%

XMMO

1D
0.62%
1M
6.87%
YTD
23.73%
6M
25.73%
1Y
36.97%
3Y*
32.10%
5Y*
16.69%
10Y*
19.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSPG vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF
34.27%7.01%6.09%4.49%57.97%57.73%-32.44%13.38%-24.68%-6.39%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF
23.73%13.04%38.03%20.39%-16.02%16.69%29.17%36.78%6.12%37.18%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPG and XMMO is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.01

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.30

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2006

0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between RSPG and XMMO has dropped to 0.01 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RSPG vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RSPG
XMMO

Energy

100.0%
7.7%

Financial Services

0.0%
2.4%

Basic Materials

-

7.2%

Communication Services

-

1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

-

4.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

0.5%

Healthcare

-

6.3%

Industrials

-

41.1%

Real Estate

-

6.1%

Technology

-

16.7%

Utilities

-

5.8%

Energy

RSPG
100.0%
XMMO
7.7%

Financial Services

RSPG
0.0%
XMMO
2.4%

Basic Materials

RSPG

-

XMMO
7.2%

Communication Services

RSPG

-

XMMO
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

RSPG

-

XMMO
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

RSPG

-

XMMO
0.5%

Healthcare

RSPG

-

XMMO
6.3%

Industrials

RSPG

-

XMMO
41.1%

Real Estate

RSPG

-

XMMO
6.1%

Technology

RSPG

-

XMMO
16.7%

Utilities

RSPG

-

XMMO
5.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

RSPG vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPG
RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

XMMO
XMMO Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
XMMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMMO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
XMMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMMO Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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. XMMO - 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 Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). 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.


RSPGXMMODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.02

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.35

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.92

4.45

-0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.59

18.21

-6.62

RSPG vs. XMMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPG Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the XMMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPG and XMMO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RSPGXMMODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.20

1.99

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

0.78

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.89

-0.60

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.18

0.58

-0.39

Drawdowns

RSPG vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPG drawdown since its inception was -79.98%, which is greater than XMMO's maximum drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPG and XMMO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RSPGXMMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-79.98%

-55.37%

-24.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.18%

-8.34%

-3.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.06%

-24.93%

+1.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.44%

-27.91%

-0.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.17%

-36.74%

-36.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.67%

0.00%

-5.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.47%

-9.45%

-16.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

2.04%

+2.07%

Volatility

RSPG vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) have volatilities of 8.19% and 7.82%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RSPGXMMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.19%

7.82%

+0.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.77%

15.54%

+1.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.69%

18.71%

+2.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.31%

21.45%

+6.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.57%

22.27%

+11.30%

RSPG vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XMMO's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

RSPG vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison

RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, more than XMMO's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF
1.94%2.60%2.43%2.84%3.43%2.37%3.15%2.15%2.18%2.55%1.14%2.80%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF
0.60%0.78%0.34%0.80%1.43%0.41%0.61%0.60%0.19%0.21%0.22%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


RSPG and XMMO have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RSPG has higher volatility (8.19%) compared to XMMO (7.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPG dropped -79.98% vs XMMO's -55.37%.

On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 19.73% vs 9.73% for RSPG. On fees, XMMO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XMMO has been the lower-risk option at 7.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 19.73% return vs 9.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMMO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPG.

RSPG has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 0.60% for XMMO.

RSPG is categorized as Energy Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. RSPG tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index, while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPG and 0.35% for XMMO.

RSPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.99), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RSPG and XMMO

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer