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

Performance

SPHB vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500® High Beta ETF (SPHB) 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, SPHB achieves a 19.95% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 2.89% return. Over the past 10 years, SPHB has outperformed XLG with an annualized return of 17.94%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively lower 16.35% annualized return.


SPHB

1D
0.05%
1M
-5.41%
6M
15.81%
YTD
19.95%
1Y
39.56%
3Y*
21.36%
5Y*
14.83%
10Y*
17.94%
ALL TIME*
13.56%

XLG

1D
1.06%
1M
0.07%
6M
3.36%
YTD
2.89%
1Y
15.84%
3Y*
20.00%
5Y*
13.72%
10Y*
16.35%
ALL TIME*
11.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$46.45M$55.30M$54.87M
$61.04M$60.71M$102.52M

SPHB vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SPHB
Invesco S&P 500® High Beta ETF
19.95%32.87%8.48%33.28%-20.59%40.58%25.56%33.96%-15.55%17.87%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
2.89%19.51%33.49%38.16%-24.29%30.77%24.15%32.04%-3.59%23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between SPHB and XLG is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.74

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.77

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.82

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2011

0.78

The correlation between SPHB and XLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

SPHB vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SPHB
XLG

Technology

45.0%
49.8%

Financial Services

14.9%
10.3%

Industrials

13.0%
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
9.3%

Healthcare

5.9%
6.8%

Utilities

3.5%
0.7%

Basic Materials

2.3%
0.6%

Communication Services

1.6%
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

0.9%
5.1%

Energy

0.8%
2.5%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

SPHB
45.0%
XLG
49.8%

Financial Services

SPHB
14.9%
XLG
10.3%

Industrials

SPHB
13.0%
XLG
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

SPHB
10.6%
XLG
9.3%

Healthcare

SPHB
5.9%
XLG
6.8%

Utilities

SPHB
3.5%
XLG
0.7%

Basic Materials

SPHB
2.3%
XLG
0.6%

Communication Services

SPHB
1.6%
XLG
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

SPHB
0.9%
XLG
5.1%

Energy

SPHB
0.8%
XLG
2.5%

Real Estate

SPHB

-

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

SPHB vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

SPHB
SPHB Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
SPHB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPHB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPHB Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
SPHB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPHB Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

SPHB vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500® High Beta ETF (SPHB) 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.


SPHBXLGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.61

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.17

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

1.10

+1.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.86

3.41

+6.45

SPHB vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPHB Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is higher than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPHB 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...

Drawdowns

SPHB vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPHB drawdown since its inception was -46.84%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPHB and XLG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SPHBXLGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.84%

-52.39%

+5.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.11%

-12.41%

-1.70%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.21%

-20.70%

-8.51%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.49%

-28.02%

-3.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.84%

-30.46%

-16.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.79%

-5.74%

-5.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.47%

-7.62%

-0.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.76%

3.98%

-0.22%

Volatility

SPHB vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500® High Beta ETF (SPHB) has a higher volatility of 9.30% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 5.03%. This indicates that SPHB'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


SPHBXLGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.30%

5.03%

+4.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.54%

11.54%

+10.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.09%

14.75%

+11.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.84%

18.89%

+8.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.57%

18.92%

+9.65%

SPHB vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPHB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

SPHB vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

SPHB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than XLG's 0.65% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SPHB
Invesco S&P 500® High Beta ETF
0.58%0.60%0.80%0.73%0.72%0.91%1.90%1.26%1.96%1.34%0.93%1.69%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.65%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


SPHB and XLG have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SPHB has higher volatility (9.30%) compared to XLG (5.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPHB dropped -46.84% vs XLG's -52.39%.

On 10-year performance, SPHB leads with 17.94% vs 16.35% for XLG. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 5.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SPHB has performed better with a 17.94% return vs 16.35%. 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 0.25% for SPHB.

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.58% for SPHB.

SPHB tracks S&P 500 High Beta Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for SPHB and 0.20% for XLG.

SPHB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.92), 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 SPHB 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