RSP vs VB
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF
Which is better, RSP or VB?
Large Cap Blend against Small Cap Blend.
VB has a lower expense ratio. RSP led over 5Y and the full window, VB over 1Y and 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. RSP is less concentrated, with 3.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 4.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | RSP | VB |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $99.6B | $79.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.46% | 1.21% |
| Holdings | 511 | 1,319 |
| YTD Return | +11.51% | +11.98%Best |
| 1Y Return | +15.15% | +15.45%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.90% | +15.91%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.58%Best | +7.03% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6%Best | 18.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -60.9%Best | -61.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,092Best | $14,045 |
| Top 10 Weight | 3.2%Best | 4.3% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 24, 2003 | Jan 26, 2004 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 30, 2004 to Sep 17, 2026 (22.6 years).
RSP vs VB growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 22.6 years both funds cover.
RSP vs VB Performance
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF (VB) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year RSP returned +15.15% while VB returned +15.45%. Year to date, RSP is up 11.51% versus a gain of 11.98% for VB.
Over three years, RSP compounded at +14.90% per year against +15.91% for VB; over five years the annualized figures are +8.58% and +7.03% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, RSP has the edge at +8.78% annualized vs +8.57%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.9% compared with 16.6% for RSP. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -60.9% for RSP and -61.0% for VB. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RSP charges 0.20% per year while VB charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RSP currently yields 1.46% against 1.21% for VB.
Holdings Overlap
24.2% of RSP's money is in holdings VB also owns. 20.4% of VB's money is in holdings RSP also owns.
RSP and VB share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 63 days apart, RSP as of Sep 1, 2026 and VB as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
123 positions in common, counted across the 502 positions we hold weights for in RSP and 1,302 in VB, against full books of 511 and 1,319.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,123 positions for VB that do not appear in our book for RSP (73.9% of the fund), and 374 for RSP that do not appear in VB (74.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in RSP | Weight in VB | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRNAModerna therapeutics | 0.58% | 0.30% | 0.28% |
| JBLJabil, Inc. | 0.16% | 0.49% | 0.33% |
| EMEEmcor Group Inc | 0.18% | 0.44% | 0.26% |
| WSMWilliams-sonoma Inc | 0.21% | 0.33% | 0.12% |
| NRGNrg Energy | 0.17% | 0.37% | 0.20% |
| ATOAtmos Energy Corp | 0.19% | 0.34% | 0.15% |
| TPRTapestry Inc. | 0.17% | 0.35% | 0.18% |
| CASYCaseys General | 0.16% | 0.35% | 0.19% |
| FLEX:SIFlex Ltd | 0.15% | 0.36% | 0.21% |
| FFIVF5 Networks Inc. | 0.20% | 0.28% | 0.08% |
24.2% of RSP is already inside VB.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, RSP or VB?
RSP has an expense ratio of 0.20% while VB charges 0.03%. VB is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, RSP or VB?
Over the past year RSP returned +15.15% vs +15.45% for VB, so VB leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), RSP annualized +8.78% vs +8.57% for VB. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, RSP or VB?
VB has been the more volatile fund at 18.9% annualized versus 16.6% for RSP. Worst drawdown: RSP -60.9% vs VB -61.0%.
Should I hold both RSP and VB?
RSP and VB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between RSP and VB?
24.2% of RSP's money is in holdings VB also owns. 20.4% of VB's is in holdings RSP also owns. They hold 123 positions in common, counted across the 502 positions we hold weights for in RSP and 1,302 in VB.
Which pays a higher dividend, RSP or VB?
RSP yields 1.46% while VB yields 1.21%, so RSP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VB better than RSP?
VB has a lower expense ratio. RSP led over 5Y and the full window, VB over 1Y and 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. RSP is less concentrated, with 3.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 4.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.