RSPM vs. SETM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RSPM (Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF) and SETM (Sprott Critical Materials ETF) are both Materials funds - RSPM tracks the S&P 500 Equal Weight Materials Index while SETM tracks the Nasdaq Sprott Critical Materials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RSPM returned 10.03%/yr vs 26.89%/yr for SETM. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RSPM charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SETM.

Performance

RSPM vs. SETM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF (RSPM) and Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with RSPM having a 15.80% return and SETM slightly higher at 15.89%.

RSPM

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 2.65%
• YTD: 15.80%
• 6M: 15.20%
• 1Y: 25.17%
• 3Y*: 10.03%
• 5Y*: 5.74%
• 10Y*: 11.03%

SETM

• 1D: -1.73%
• 1M: -4.22%
• YTD: 15.89%
• 6M: 15.21%
• 1Y: 105.69%
• 3Y*: 26.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RSPM vs. SETM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RSPM Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF	15.80%	6.90%	-1.30%	-2.69%
SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF	15.89%	95.27%	-13.24%	-13.11%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPM and SETM is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2023	0.59

The correlation between RSPM and SETM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSPM vs. SETM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPM	SETM
Basic Materials	77.7%	76.0%
Consumer Cyclical	21.9%	-
Industrials	3.5%	1.0%
Financial Services	0.4%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	0.1%
Energy	-	22.9%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RSPM vs. SETM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPM

RSPM Risk / Return Rank: 39
RSPM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
RSPM Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
RSPM Omega Ratio Rank: 36
RSPM Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
RSPM Martin Ratio Rank: 37

SETM

SETM Risk / Return Rank: 67
SETM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
SETM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
SETM Omega Ratio Rank: 58
SETM Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
SETM Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

RSPM vs. SETM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF (RSPM) and Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM). 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.

	RSPM	SETM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	2.29	-0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	2.59	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.35	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	4.11	-2.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.47	11.83	-6.36

RSPM vs. SETM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPM Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the SETM Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPM and SETM, 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

RSPM vs. SETM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPM drawdown since its inception was -61.18%, which is greater than SETM's maximum drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPM and SETM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPM	SETM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.18%	-42.81%	-18.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.32%	-25.85%	+13.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.19%	-42.81%	+15.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.19%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.11%	-15.55%	+11.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.78%	-15.02%	+6.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.61%	8.96%	-4.35%

Volatility

RSPM vs. SETM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF (RSPM) is 6.10%, while Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM) has a volatility of 16.80%. This indicates that RSPM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SETM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPM	SETM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.10%	16.80%	-10.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.05%	37.30%	-23.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.84%	46.57%	-27.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.17%	37.18%	-17.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.98%	37.18%	-15.20%

RSPM vs. SETM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPM has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than SETM's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPM vs. SETM - Dividend Comparison

RSPM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.20%, more than SETM's 1.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RSPM Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF	2.20%	2.06%	2.04%	2.05%	2.19%	1.43%	1.57%	1.81%	1.83%	1.50%	1.28%	1.57%
SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF	1.35%	1.56%	2.07%	2.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSPM and SETM in my portfolio?

RSPM and SETM have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSPM or SETM?

SETM has higher volatility (16.80%) compared to RSPM (6.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPM dropped -61.18% vs SETM's -42.81%.

Which ETF is better, RSPM or SETM?

On 3-year performance, SETM leads with 26.89% vs 10.03% for RSPM. On fees, RSPM is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, RSPM has been the lower-risk option at 6.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPM or SETM?

Over the 3-year period, SETM has performed better with a 26.89% return vs 10.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPM or SETM?

RSPM is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SETM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSPM or SETM?

RSPM has the higher dividend yield at 2.20%, compared with 1.35% for SETM.

What is the main difference between RSPM and SETM?

RSPM tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Materials Index, while SETM tracks Nasdaq Sprott Critical Materials Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPM and 0.65% for SETM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SETM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.34), 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.