Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

RSP vs SPYG: how they differ

RSP and SPYG hold 20% of their weight in the same names, and SPYG returned more over the year.

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF and State Street(R) SPDR(R) Portfolio S&P 500(R) Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, RSP and SPYG hold 20% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions RSP and SPYG both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingRSPSPYG
Newmont Corp0.26%0.38%
Robinhood Markets Inc0.25%0.25%
Crowdstrike Holdings Inc0.25%0.60%
Palo Alto Networks Inc0.25%0.43%
Palantir Technologies Inc0.25%1.07%
Arista Networks Inc0.24%0.55%
Microsoft Corp0.24%10.27%
ServiceNow Inc0.24%0.23%
Gilead Sciences Inc0.23%0.27%
Mastercard Inc0.22%0.86%
JPMorgan Chase & Co0.22%1.81%
Amgen Inc0.22%0.39%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in RSPOnly in SPYG
Moderna Inc 0.58%SSI US GOV MONEY MARKET CLASS 0.06%
Zebra Technologies Corp 0.31%US DOLLAR 0.00%
Marathon Petroleum Corp 0.29%
Valero Energy Corp 0.29%
Charles River Laboratories International 0.28%
Phillips 66 0.28%
Salesforce Inc 0.28%
Global Payments Inc 0.28%

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 Sep 10, 2026.

RSP and SPYG on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
SPYG
State Street(R) SPDR(R) Portfolio S&P 500(R) Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerInvescoState Street
What it isS&P 500 equal weightSPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth
Total return, 1 year+14.8%+17.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−2.7 pts+0.4 pts
Expense ratio0.20%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50099.1%100.0%
Holdings506150

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 Sep 10, 2026, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 506 positions, with the top ten at 3.2%. It sat 3.5% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

SPYG in plain words

SPYG is an index equity fund tracking the SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 150 positions, with the top ten at 59.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, RSP or SPYG?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, RSP returned +14.8% and SPYG returned +17.9%, so SPYG returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, RSP or SPYG?
RSP charges 0.20% a year and SPYG charges 0.04%, so SPYG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do RSP and SPYG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 99% of RSP and 100% of SPYG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 20% 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.

RSP against SPYG, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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, RSP against SPYG, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/rsp-vs-spyg Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources