PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RWL vs. RSP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RWL vs. RSP - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWL achieves a 11.07% return, which is significantly higher than RSP's 9.70% return. Over the past 10 years, RWL has outperformed RSP with an annualized return of 13.96%, while RSP has yielded a comparatively lower 11.86% annualized return.


RWL

1D
-0.42%
1M
3.13%
YTD
11.07%
6M
11.66%
1Y
26.76%
3Y*
19.96%
5Y*
12.89%
10Y*
13.96%

RSP

1D
-0.38%
1M
3.77%
YTD
9.70%
6M
10.18%
1Y
19.50%
3Y*
15.23%
5Y*
8.33%
10Y*
11.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RWL vs. RSP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RWL
Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF
11.07%18.65%16.45%17.43%-6.00%30.29%9.14%27.83%-7.74%20.34%
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
9.70%11.21%12.79%13.70%-11.62%29.41%12.66%28.91%-7.84%18.52%

Correlation

The correlation between RWL and RSP is 0.89, 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

0.89

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

0.92

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

0.94

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

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008

0.95

The correlation between RWL and RSP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWL vs. RSP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RWL
RSP

Healthcare

19.5%
11.0%

Financial Services

15.4%
14.5%

Technology

13.7%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

12.3%
9.9%

Consumer Defensive

11.1%
6.5%

Industrials

8.6%
14.1%

Communication Services

7.5%
3.7%

Energy

6.6%
4.5%

Utilities

2.4%
6.1%

Basic Materials

2.1%
4.1%

Real Estate

0.9%
6.0%

Healthcare

RWL
19.5%
RSP
11.0%

Financial Services

RWL
15.4%
RSP
14.5%

Technology

RWL
13.7%
RSP
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

RWL
12.3%
RSP
9.9%

Consumer Defensive

RWL
11.1%
RSP
6.5%

Industrials

RWL
8.6%
RSP
14.1%

Communication Services

RWL
7.5%
RSP
3.7%

Energy

RWL
6.6%
RSP
4.5%

Utilities

RWL
2.4%
RSP
6.1%

Basic Materials

RWL
2.1%
RSP
4.1%

Real Estate

RWL
0.9%
RSP
6.0%

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

RWL vs. RSP — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWL
RWL Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
RWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWL Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
RWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWL Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

RSP
RSP Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
RSP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSP Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSP Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
RSP Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSP Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
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.

RWL vs. RSP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP). 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.


RWLRSPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.30

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.05

2.49

+1.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.12

9.48

+7.64

RWL vs. RSP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the RSP Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWL and RSP, 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


RWLRSPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.69

1.70

+0.99

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

0.52

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

0.65

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.57

+0.01

Drawdowns

RWL vs. RSP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWL drawdown since its inception was -54.83%, smaller than the maximum RSP drawdown of -59.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWL and RSP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RWLRSPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-54.83%

-59.92%

+5.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.64%

-7.85%

+1.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.39%

-17.81%

+3.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.49%

-21.38%

+3.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.04%

-39.04%

+3.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.57%

-0.38%

-0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.45%

-6.65%

+0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.57%

2.06%

-0.49%

Volatility

RWL vs. RSP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) is 2.12%, while Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) has a volatility of 2.56%. This indicates that RWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RWLRSPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.12%

2.56%

-0.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.12%

8.29%

-1.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.00%

11.56%

-1.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.50%

16.18%

-1.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.86%

18.35%

-1.49%

RWL vs. RSP - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWL has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than RSP's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

RWL vs. RSP - Dividend Comparison

RWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, less than RSP's 1.49% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
1.49%1.64%1.52%1.64%1.82%1.28%1.64%1.69%2.02%1.52%1.20%1.70%
RWL
Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF
1.25%1.35%1.43%1.60%1.62%1.35%1.75%1.87%1.99%1.60%1.71%1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions


RWL and RSP have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RSP has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to RWL (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWL dropped -54.83% vs RSP's -59.92%.

On 10-year performance, RWL leads with 13.96% vs 11.86% for RSP. On fees, RSP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, RWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RWL has performed better with a 13.96% return vs 11.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RSP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWL.

RSP has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 1.25% for RWL.

RWL tracks S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index, while RSP tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWL and 0.20% for RSP.

RWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 1.70), 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 RWL and RSP

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