RSPU vs. FPWR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RSPU (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF) and FPWR (First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF) are both Utilities Equities funds. RSPU is passively managed, while FPWR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RSPU returned 12.17%/yr vs 12.46%/yr for FPWR. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RSPU charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for FPWR.

Performance

RSPU vs. FPWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF (RSPU) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPU achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly lower than FPWR's 14.10% return.

RSPU

• 1D: 0.98%
• 1M: 0.63%
• YTD: 8.91%
• 6M: 9.36%
• 1Y: 16.62%
• 3Y*: 16.87%
• 5Y*: 12.17%
• 10Y*: 9.73%

FPWR

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -0.82%
• YTD: 14.10%
• 6M: 14.06%
• 1Y: 20.93%
• 3Y*: 18.24%
• 5Y*: 12.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

RSPU vs. FPWR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RSPU Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF	8.91%	16.82%	23.57%	-3.45%	4.37%	17.13%	-2.70%	5.42%
FPWR First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF	14.10%	16.78%	22.60%	-3.36%	5.28%	12.26%	8.98%	5.66%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPU and FPWR is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2019	0.87

The correlation between RSPU and FPWR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSPU vs. FPWR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPU	FPWR
Utilities	99.6%	51.7%
Financial Services	0.4%	1.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	30.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	6.7%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

RSPU vs. FPWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPU

RSPU Risk / Return Rank: 34
RSPU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
RSPU Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
RSPU Omega Ratio Rank: 32
RSPU Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
RSPU Martin Ratio Rank: 31

FPWR

FPWR Risk / Return Rank: 70
FPWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
FPWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
FPWR Omega Ratio Rank: 64
FPWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FPWR Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

RSPU vs. FPWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF (RSPU) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR). 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.

	RSPU	FPWR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	2.00	-0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	2.89	-1.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.35	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	4.19	-2.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.36	10.54	-6.17

RSPU vs. FPWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPU Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the FPWR Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPU and FPWR, 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

RSPU vs. FPWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPU drawdown since its inception was -48.08%, which is greater than FPWR's maximum drawdown of -32.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPU and FPWR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPU	FPWR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.08%	-32.28%	-15.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.46%	-5.02%	-3.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.27%	-14.68%	-1.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.86%	-19.88%	-1.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.85%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.54%	-1.98%	-1.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.84%	-4.98%	-2.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.82%	1.99%	+1.83%

Volatility

RSPU vs. FPWR - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF (RSPU) has a higher volatility of 4.98% compared to First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR) at 3.60%. This indicates that RSPU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FPWR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPU	FPWR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.98%	3.60%	+1.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.20%	8.20%	+3.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.13%	10.57%	+3.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.90%	14.21%	+2.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.12%	17.36%	+1.76%

RSPU vs. FPWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPU has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than FPWR's 0.96% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPU vs. FPWR - Dividend Comparison

RSPU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, more than FPWR's 1.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FPWR First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF	1.80%	1.97%	2.52%	2.54%	1.72%	1.66%	1.68%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPU Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF	2.52%	2.54%	2.39%	2.92%	2.35%	2.41%	2.94%	2.54%	3.11%	3.08%	2.98%	4.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSPU and FPWR in my portfolio?

RSPU and FPWR have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSPU or FPWR?

RSPU has higher volatility (4.98%) compared to FPWR (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPU dropped -48.08% vs FPWR's -32.28%.

Which ETF is better, RSPU or FPWR?

On 5-year performance, FPWR leads with 12.46% vs 12.17% for RSPU. On fees, RSPU is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, FPWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPU or FPWR?

Over the 5-year period, FPWR has performed better with a 12.46% return vs 12.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPU or FPWR?

RSPU is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for FPWR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSPU or FPWR?

RSPU has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 1.80% for FPWR.

What is the main difference between RSPU and FPWR?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPU and 0.96% for FPWR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FPWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.19), 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.