RSPN vs. XLG
RSPN (Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSPN is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RSPN returned 15.13%/yr vs 17.16%/yr for XLG. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RSPN charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.
Performance
RSPN vs. XLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RSPN achieves a 11.03% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 3.55% return. Over the past 10 years, RSPN has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 15.13%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.16% annualized return.
RSPN
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 4.48%
- YTD
- 11.03%
- 6M
- 9.28%
- 1Y
- 22.27%
- 3Y*
- 18.21%
- 5Y*
- 12.23%
- 10Y*
- 15.13%
XLG
- 1D
- -0.78%
- 1M
- -3.59%
- YTD
- 3.55%
- 6M
- 3.44%
- 1Y
- 23.61%
- 3Y*
- 22.12%
- 5Y*
- 14.84%
- 10Y*
- 17.16%
RSPN vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RSPN Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials ETF | 11.03% | 13.84% | 17.63% | 22.32% | -8.79% | 26.07% | 18.07% | 33.17% | -13.23% | 23.22% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 3.55% | 19.51% | 33.49% | 38.16% | -24.29% | 30.77% | 24.15% | 32.04% | -3.59% | 23.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between RSPN and XLG is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2006 | 0.68 |
Over the past year, the correlation between RSPN and XLG has dropped to 0.43 - well below their long-term average of 0.68, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
RSPN vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RSPN
XLG
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
-
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
RSPN
XLG
Technology
RSPN
XLG
Consumer Cyclical
RSPN
XLG
Utilities
RSPN
XLG
-
Financial Services
RSPN
XLG
Basic Materials
RSPN
-
XLG
Communication Services
RSPN
-
XLG
Consumer Defensive
RSPN
-
XLG
Energy
RSPN
-
XLG
Healthcare
RSPN
-
XLG
Real Estate
RSPN
-
XLG
-
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
RSPN vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank
RSPN
XLG
RSPN vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials ETF (RSPN) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.
| RSPN | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.31 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.81 | 1.91 | -0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.20 | 6.89 | -0.69 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RSPN vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RSPN drawdown since its inception was -59.61%, which is greater than XLG's maximum drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPN and XLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RSPN | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.61% | -52.39% | -7.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.36% | -12.41% | +0.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.89% | -20.70% | -0.19% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.88% | -28.02% | +6.14% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.02% | -30.46% | -11.56% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.65% | -5.13% | +3.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.66% | -7.63% | -0.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.60% | 3.44% | +0.16% |
Volatility
RSPN vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials ETF (RSPN) has a higher volatility of 5.44% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 4.74%. This indicates that RSPN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RSPN | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.44% | 4.74% | +0.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.79% | 10.60% | +2.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.04% | 13.86% | +2.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.26% | 18.77% | -0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.41% | 18.89% | +1.52% |
RSPN vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
RSPN has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
RSPN vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison
RSPN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.03%, more than XLG's 0.82% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RSPN Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials ETF | 1.03% | 0.86% | 0.98% | 1.06% | 1.09% | 0.70% | 0.96% | 1.33% | 1.49% | 1.12% | 1.31% | 1.51% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 0.82% | 0.64% | 0.72% | 0.97% | 1.34% | 0.94% | 1.25% | 1.58% | 2.00% | 1.85% | 2.00% | 2.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RSPN and XLG have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RSPN has higher volatility (5.44%) compared to XLG (4.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPN dropped -59.61% vs XLG's -52.39%.
On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 17.16% vs 15.13% for RSPN. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 17.16% return vs 15.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPN.
RSPN has the higher dividend yield at 1.03%, compared with 0.82% for XLG.
RSPN is categorized as Industrials Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. RSPN tracks S&P 500® Equal Weight Industrials Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPN and 0.20% for XLG.
XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.40), 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.
Find the right allocation for RSPN and XLG
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