PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RSPH vs. AGNG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RSPH vs. AGNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPH achieves a -3.49% return, which is significantly higher than AGNG's -5.18% return. Over the past 10 years, RSPH has underperformed AGNG with an annualized return of 7.86%, while AGNG has yielded a comparatively higher 8.71% annualized return.


RSPH

1D
-1.16%
1M
1.35%
YTD
-3.49%
6M
-3.00%
1Y
8.54%
3Y*
2.93%
5Y*
2.46%
10Y*
7.86%

AGNG

1D
-1.43%
1M
-3.01%
YTD
-5.18%
6M
-5.52%
1Y
8.97%
3Y*
8.10%
5Y*
4.10%
10Y*
8.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSPH vs. AGNG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RSPH
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF
-3.49%9.52%-0.94%3.95%-9.40%23.19%18.83%25.48%-0.66%23.70%
AGNG
Global X Aging Population ETF
-5.18%20.01%7.03%9.65%-8.61%3.91%18.96%25.24%-1.45%28.17%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPH and AGNG is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.76

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

0.77

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

0.82

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

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2016

0.74

The correlation between RSPH and AGNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSPH vs. AGNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RSPH
AGNG

Healthcare

98.5%
90.8%

Financial Services

0.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

9.2%

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

RSPH
98.5%
AGNG
90.8%

Financial Services

RSPH
0.1%
AGNG

-

Basic Materials

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Communication Services

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Consumer Cyclical

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Consumer Defensive

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Energy

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Industrials

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Real Estate

RSPH

-

AGNG
9.2%

Technology

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

Utilities

RSPH

-

AGNG

-

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

RSPH vs. AGNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPH
RSPH Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
RSPH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSPH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSPH Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
RSPH Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSPH Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

AGNG
AGNG Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
AGNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AGNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
AGNG Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
AGNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
AGNG Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
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.

RSPH vs. AGNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG). 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.


RSPHAGNGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.56

0.66

-0.11

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.90

1.04

-0.14

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.12

-0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.76

0.84

-0.08

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

1.91

2.31

-0.40

RSPH vs. AGNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPH Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is comparable to the AGNG Sharpe Ratio of 0.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPH and AGNG, 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


RSPHAGNGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.56

0.66

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.15

0.27

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

0.51

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.53

+0.05

Drawdowns

RSPH vs. AGNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPH drawdown since its inception was -40.49%, which is greater than AGNG's maximum drawdown of -30.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPH and AGNG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RSPHAGNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.49%

-30.58%

-9.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.87%

-11.45%

+0.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.13%

-14.48%

-2.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.95%

-25.66%

+3.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.44%

-30.58%

+0.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.58%

-11.45%

+3.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.14%

-5.95%

-0.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.31%

4.14%

+0.17%

Volatility

RSPH vs. AGNG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) have volatilities of 3.82% and 3.85%, 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


RSPHAGNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.82%

3.85%

-0.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.44%

10.07%

+0.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.45%

13.63%

+1.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.26%

15.22%

+1.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.72%

17.13%

+0.59%

RSPH vs. AGNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPH has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than AGNG's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

RSPH vs. AGNG - Dividend Comparison

RSPH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, less than AGNG's 0.92% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AGNG
Global X Aging Population ETF
0.92%0.88%0.83%0.96%0.49%0.72%0.36%0.83%1.00%1.04%0.45%0.00%
RSPH
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF
0.73%0.70%0.71%0.66%0.64%0.50%0.51%0.54%0.53%0.47%0.48%0.49%

Frequently Asked Questions


RSPH and AGNG have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AGNG has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to RSPH (3.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPH dropped -40.49% vs AGNG's -30.58%.

On 10-year performance, AGNG leads with 8.71% vs 7.86% for RSPH. On fees, RSPH is cheaper at 0.40% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AGNG has performed better with a 8.71% return vs 7.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RSPH is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AGNG.

AGNG has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.73% for RSPH.

RSPH tracks S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Health Care -SEC, while AGNG tracks Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPH and 0.50% for AGNG.

AGNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.66 vs 0.56), 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 RSPH and AGNG

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