PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RSPU vs. XLG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RSPU vs. XLG - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPU achieves a 5.10% return, which is significantly lower than XLG's 8.82% return. Over the past 10 years, RSPU has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 9.42%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.41% annualized return.


RSPU

1D
1.69%
1M
-4.51%
YTD
5.10%
6M
3.75%
1Y
11.44%
3Y*
15.80%
5Y*
10.73%
10Y*
9.42%

XLG

1D
-0.29%
1M
5.06%
YTD
8.82%
6M
8.60%
1Y
30.80%
3Y*
24.94%
5Y*
16.76%
10Y*
17.41%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSPU vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RSPU
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF
5.10%16.82%23.57%-3.45%4.37%17.13%-2.70%22.94%6.89%9.43%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
8.82%19.51%33.49%38.16%-24.29%30.77%24.15%32.04%-3.59%23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPU and XLG is 0.04, 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

0.04

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

0.13

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

0.27

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

0.29

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

0.41

Over the past year, the correlation between RSPU and XLG has dropped to 0.04 - well below their long-term average of 0.41, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RSPU vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RSPU
XLG

Utilities

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

0.6%

Communication Services

-

17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

11.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.8%

Energy

-

2.7%

Financial Services

-

9.6%

Healthcare

-

7.0%

Industrials

-

1.9%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

43.9%

Utilities

RSPU
100.0%
XLG

-

Basic Materials

RSPU

-

XLG
0.6%

Communication Services

RSPU

-

XLG
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

RSPU

-

XLG
11.3%

Consumer Defensive

RSPU

-

XLG
5.8%

Energy

RSPU

-

XLG
2.7%

Financial Services

RSPU

-

XLG
9.6%

Healthcare

RSPU

-

XLG
7.0%

Industrials

RSPU

-

XLG
1.9%

Real Estate

RSPU

-

XLG

-

Technology

RSPU

-

XLG
43.9%

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

RSPU vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPU
RSPU Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
RSPU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSPU Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSPU Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
RSPU Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSPU Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

RSPU vs. XLG - 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 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.


RSPUXLGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.82

2.33

-1.51

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.18

3.14

-1.96

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.41

-0.27

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.39

2.55

-1.17

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.26

9.60

-6.34

RSPU vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPU Sharpe Ratio is 0.82, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPU and XLG, 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


RSPUXLGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.82

2.33

-1.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.90

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.93

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.47

0.63

-0.16

Drawdowns

RSPU vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPU drawdown since its inception was -48.08%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPU and XLG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RSPUXLGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.08%

-52.39%

+4.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.46%

-12.41%

+3.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.27%

-20.70%

+4.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.86%

-28.02%

+6.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.85%

-30.46%

-6.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.91%

-0.29%

-6.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.85%

-7.64%

-0.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.60%

3.30%

+0.30%

Volatility

RSPU vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF (RSPU) has a higher volatility of 5.21% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 2.92%. This indicates that RSPU'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


RSPUXLGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.21%

2.92%

+2.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.17%

9.73%

+1.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.98%

13.28%

+0.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.92%

18.68%

-1.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.09%

18.84%

+0.25%

RSPU vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPU has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

RSPU vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

RSPU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, more than XLG's 0.59% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RSPU
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF
2.53%2.54%2.39%2.92%2.35%2.41%2.94%2.54%3.11%3.08%2.98%4.14%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.59%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


RSPU and XLG have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RSPU has higher volatility (5.21%) compared to XLG (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPU dropped -48.08% vs XLG's -52.39%.

On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 17.41% vs 9.42% for RSPU. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 2.92%. 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 17.41% return vs 9.42%. 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 RSPU.

RSPU has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.59% for XLG.

RSPU is categorized as Utilities Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. RSPU tracks S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Utilities Plus, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPU and 0.20% for XLG.

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 0.82), 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 RSPU 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