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

FDVV vs RSP: how they differ

FDVV and RSP hold 14% of their weight in the same names, and FDVV returned more over the year.

Fidelity High Dividend ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FDVV and RSP hold 14% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FDVV and RSP both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFDVVRSP
DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC1.44%0.27%
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC.1.32%0.27%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC0.47%0.25%
SKYWORKS SOLUTIONS INC0.96%0.24%
CATERPILLAR INC0.46%0.24%
BROADCOM INC3.50%0.24%
BLACKSTONE INC1.33%0.23%
HP INC0.86%0.22%
TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP1.28%0.22%
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (THE)1.71%0.22%
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION1.78%0.21%
ALTRIA GROUP INC1.70%0.21%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FDVVOnly in RSP
ORKLA ASA 1.37%Intel Corp. 0.38%
ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT INC 1.28%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.34%
VAIL RESORTS INC 1.27%Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 0.33%
BANCA MONTE DEI PASCHI DI SIENA SPA 1.26%ON Semiconductor Corp. 0.33%
OLD REPUBLIC INTL CORP 1.25%Sandisk Corp. 0.32%
DANSKE BANK A/S 1.24%Western Digital Corp. 0.31%
BANCO BPM SPA 1.18%Ciena Corp. 0.30%
STELLANTIS NV 0.96%Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 0.29%

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.

FDVV and RSP on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FDVV
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelityInvesco
What it isHigh DividendS&P 500 equal weight
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+14.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts−2.7 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.20%
Already in the S&P 50086.7%99.1%
Holdings96503

FDVV in plain words

FDVV is an index equity fund tracking the High Dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 96 positions, with the top ten at 32.5%.

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, FDVV or RSP?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FDVV returned +17.2% and RSP returned +14.8%, so FDVV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FDVV or RSP?
FDVV charges 0.15% a year and RSP charges 0.20%, so FDVV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FDVV and RSP overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FDVV and 99% of RSP by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 14% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources