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 XLF: how they differ

RSP and XLF hold 15% of their weight in the same names, and RSP returned more over the year.

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF and State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, RSP and XLF hold 15% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions RSP and XLF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingRSPXLF
Global Payments Inc0.28%0.26%
PayPal Holdings Inc0.26%0.59%
Robinhood Markets Inc0.25%1.12%
Ameriprise Financial Inc0.24%0.62%
Travelers Cos Inc/The0.24%0.97%
Charles Schwab Corp/The0.23%2.19%
Willis Towers Watson PLC0.23%0.37%
Block Inc0.23%0.53%
State Street Corp0.23%0.66%
Corpay Inc0.23%0.33%
Capital One Financial Corp0.23%1.61%
Bank of New York Mellon Corp/The0.23%1.39%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in RSPOnly in XLF
Moderna Inc 0.58%SSI US GOV MONEY MARKET CLASS 0.15%
Veeva Systems Inc 0.31%XAF FINANCIAL SEP26 0.01%
Zebra Technologies Corp 0.31%POUND STERLING 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%

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 XLF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
XLF
State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerInvescoState Street
What it isS&P 500 equal weightFinancials
Total return, 1 year+14.8%+7.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−2.7 pts−9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.20%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50099.1%100.0%
Holdings50679

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.

XLF in plain words

XLF is an index equity fund tracking the Financials. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% 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 79 positions, with the top ten at 57.3%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, RSP or XLF?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, RSP returned +14.8% and XLF returned +7.6%, so RSP returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, RSP or XLF?
RSP charges 0.20% a year and XLF charges 0.08%, so XLF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do RSP and XLF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 99% of RSP and 100% of XLF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 15% 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 XLF, 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 XLF, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/rsp-vs-xlf Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources