XDIV vs. RSPG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

XDIV (Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF) and RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XDIV is a S&P 500 fund actively managed by Roundhill, while RSPG is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index. XDIV is actively managed, while RSPG is passively managed. Over the past year, XDIV returned 21.62% vs 46.87% for RSPG. Their -0.07 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. XDIV charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPG.

Performance

XDIV vs. RSPG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF (XDIV) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDIV achieves a 9.87% return, which is significantly lower than RSPG's 35.64% return.

XDIV

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: 0.16%
• 6M: 8.62%
• YTD: 9.87%
• 1Y: 21.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.71%

RSPG

• 1D: 1.45%
• 1M: 9.65%
• 6M: 20.75%
• YTD: 35.64%
• 1Y: 46.87%
• 3Y*: 15.10%
• 5Y*: 24.85%
• 10Y*: 9.99%
• ALL TIME*: 6.10%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	$7.49M	$8.09M	$10.58M
XDIV Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF	$776.99K	$488.30K	$530.83K

XDIV vs. RSPG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XDIV Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF	9.87%	10.07%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	35.64%	4.60%

Correlation

The correlation between XDIV and RSPG is -0.08, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2025	-0.07

XDIV vs. RSPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XDIV	RSPG
Technology	38.5%	-
Financial Services	11.6%	0.0%
Communication Services	9.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	-
Healthcare	8.9%	-
Industrials	8.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	-
Energy	3.0%	100.0%
Utilities	2.2%	-
Real Estate	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

XDIV vs. RSPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDIV

XDIV Risk / Return Rank: 67
XDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
XDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
XDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 66
XDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
XDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 76

RSPG

RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 78
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 77
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

XDIV vs. RSPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF (XDIV) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). 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.

	XDIV	RSPG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.54	1.98	-0.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.54	-0.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.32	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.18	3.18	-1.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.38	8.07	+1.31

XDIV vs. RSPG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDIV Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is comparable to the RSPG Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDIV and RSPG, 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

XDIV vs. RSPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDIV drawdown since its inception was -9.16%, smaller than the maximum RSPG drawdown of -79.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDIV and RSPG.

Drawdown Indicators

	XDIV	RSPG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.16%	-79.98%	+70.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.16%	-13.72%	+4.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.44%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.35%	-4.71%	+3.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.31%	-25.33%	+24.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	5.43%	-3.31%

Volatility

XDIV vs. RSPG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF (XDIV) is 3.29%, while Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a volatility of 6.13%. This indicates that XDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSPG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XDIV	RSPG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	6.13%	-2.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.24%	16.97%	-6.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.97%	22.06%	-9.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.66%	27.93%	-15.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.66%	33.44%	-20.78%

XDIV vs. RSPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDIV has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than RSPG's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

XDIV vs. RSPG - Dividend Comparison

XDIV has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	1.96%	2.60%	2.43%	2.84%	3.43%	2.37%	3.15%	2.15%	2.18%	2.55%	1.14%	2.80%
XDIV Roundhill S&P 500 No Dividend Target ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XDIV and RSPG in my portfolio?

XDIV and RSPG have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XDIV or RSPG?

RSPG has higher volatility (6.13%) compared to XDIV (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XDIV dropped -9.16% vs RSPG's -79.98%.

Which ETF is better, XDIV or RSPG?

On 1-year performance, RSPG leads with 46.87% vs 21.62% for XDIV. On fees, XDIV is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XDIV has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XDIV or RSPG?

Over the 1-year period, RSPG has performed better with a 46.87% return vs 21.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XDIV or RSPG?

XDIV is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XDIV or RSPG?

RSPG has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.00% for XDIV.

What is the main difference between XDIV and RSPG?

XDIV is categorized as S&P 500, while RSPG is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XDIV and 0.40% for RSPG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 1.54), 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.