Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ACWI vs RSP: how they differ

ACWI and RSP hold 33% of their weight in the same names, and ACWI returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWI and RSP hold 33% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWI and RSP both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWIRSP
INTEL CORPORATION0.43%0.38%
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC.0.58%0.33%
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED0.26%0.27%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED0.34%0.25%
GE VERNOVA INC.0.30%0.25%
CATERPILLAR INC.0.42%0.24%
AMAZON.COM, INC.2.58%0.24%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.0.59%0.24%
BROADCOM INC.1.90%0.24%
KLA CORPORATION0.23%0.23%
LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION0.33%0.23%
MORGAN STANLEY0.23%0.23%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWIOnly in RSP
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 1.73%Sandisk Corp. 0.32%
ASML Holding N.V. 0.56%Skyworks Solutions, Inc. 0.24%
SK hynix Inc. 0.49%APA Corp. 0.24%
Tencent Holdings Limited 0.39%Generac Holdings Inc. 0.23%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 0.32%Franklin Resources, Inc. 0.23%
ASTRAZENECA PLC 0.29%Albemarle Corp. 0.23%
Alibaba Group Holding Limited 0.29%BXP, Inc. 0.22%
Novartis AG 0.28%FactSet Research Systems Inc. 0.21%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026.

ACWI and RSP on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesInvesco
What it isMSCI ACWIS&P 500 equal weight
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+14.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts−2.7 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.20%
Already in the S&P 50061.4%99.1%
Holdings2307503

ACWI in plain words

ACWI is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.32% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 61% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2307 positions, with the top ten at 24.6%.

RSP in plain words

RSP is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 equal weight. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +14.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.20% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 503 positions, with the top ten at 3.2%. It sat 3.5% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWI or RSP?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWI returned +19.1% and RSP returned +14.8%, so ACWI returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWI or RSP?
ACWI charges 0.32% a year and RSP charges 0.20%, so RSP is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWI and RSP overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 61% of ACWI and 99% of RSP by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 33% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ACWI against RSP, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACWI against RSP, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ACWI-RSP Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources