RSP vs XLF
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF vs State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
XLF has a lower expense ratio. RSP delivered stronger 1-year returns. RSP offers more diversification with 510 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | RSP | XLF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $97.4B | $56.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.51% | 1.51% | |
| Holdings | 510 | 80 | |
| YTD Return | +16.43% | +6.98% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.73% | +12.14% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.53% | +20.59% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.20% | +10.49% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5% | 21.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.9% | -83.8% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 24, 2003 | Dec 16, 1998 |
RSP vs XLF Performance
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year RSP returned +20.73% while XLF returned +12.14%. Year to date, RSP is up 16.43% versus a gain of 6.98% for XLF.
Over three years, RSP compounded at +15.53% per year against +20.59% for XLF; over five years the annualized figures are +9.20% and +10.49% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, RSP has the edge at +10.15% annualized vs +3.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.4% compared with 16.5% 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 -83.8% for XLF. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RSP charges 0.20% per year while XLF charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $8 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RSP currently yields 1.51% against 1.51% for XLF.
Holdings Overlap
RSP and XLF share 64 holdings out of 446 unique holdings combined, representing a 12.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, RSP or XLF?
RSP has an expense ratio of 0.20% while XLF charges 0.08%. XLF is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, RSP or XLF?
Over the past year RSP returned +20.73% vs +12.14% for XLF, so RSP leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), RSP annualized +10.15% vs +3.73% for XLF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, RSP or XLF?
XLF has been the more volatile fund at 21.4% annualized versus 16.5% for RSP. Worst drawdown: RSP -60.9% vs XLF -83.8%.
Should I hold both RSP and XLF?
RSP and XLF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between RSP and XLF?
RSP and XLF share 64 common holdings with a 12.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 446 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, RSP or XLF?
RSP yields 1.51% while XLF yields 1.51%, so RSP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.