Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
RSP vs XOVR: how they differ
RSP and XOVR hold 2% of their weight in the same names, and RSP returned more over the year.
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF and ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, RSP and XOVR hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | RSP | XOVR |
|---|---|---|
| Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. | 0.29% | 1.77% |
| Arista Networks, Inc. | 0.24% | 2.31% |
| NVIDIA Corp. | 0.21% | 9.48% |
| DoorDash, Inc. | 0.19% | 2.04% |
| AppLovin Corp. | 0.19% | 3.95% |
| Meta Platforms, Inc. | 0.18% | 4.47% |
| Tesla, Inc. | 0.18% | 1.63% |
| Robinhood Markets, Inc. | 0.18% | 3.56% |
| Palantir Technologies Inc. | 0.18% | 0.56% |
| ResMed Inc. | 0.17% | 1.36% |
| Axon Enterprise, Inc. | 0.15% | 2.60% |
| Alphabet Inc. | 0.13% | 6.53% |
| Only in RSP | Only in XOVR |
|---|---|
| Intel Corp. 0.38% | Astera Labs Inc 7.75% |
| Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.34% | Natera Inc 3.70% |
| Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 0.33% | Veeva Systems Inc 3.17% |
| ON Semiconductor Corp. 0.33% | Reddit Inc 2.78% |
| Sandisk Corp. 0.32% | Affirm Holdings Inc 2.64% |
| Western Digital Corp. 0.31% | Rocket Lab Corp 2.50% |
| Ciena Corp. 0.30% | Mongodb Inc 2.29% |
| Centene Corp. 0.29% | Roku Inc 2.16% |
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 and Jun 30, 2026.
| RSP Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF | XOVR ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Invesco | ERShares |
| What it is | S&P 500 equal weight | Private-Public Crossover |
| Total return, 1 year | +14.8% | 0.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −2.7 pts | −17.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.20% | 0.75% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 99.1% | 43.4% |
| Holdings | 503 | 32 |
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.
XOVR in plain words
XOVR is an index equity fund tracking the Private-Public Crossover. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned 0.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 43% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 32 positions, with the top ten at 63.1%. It sat 4.2% below its high of Oct 27, 2025 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, RSP or XOVR?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, RSP returned +14.8% and XOVR returned 0.0%, so RSP returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, RSP or XOVR?
- RSP charges 0.20% a year and XOVR charges 0.75%, so RSP is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do RSP and XOVR overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 99% of RSP and 43% of XOVR by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, RSP against XOVR, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/RSP-XOVR Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources