RSPS vs VTI
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, RSPS or VTI?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. RSPS is less concentrated, with 31.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.5%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | RSPS | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $443M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.10% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 74 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +6.57% | +13.02%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.10% | +16.63%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.25% | +21.97%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.86% | +11.99%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.1%Best | 15.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -37.5%Best | -56.6% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,965 | $17,616Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 31.9%Best | 33.5% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 1, 2006 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 7, 2006 to Oct 14, 2026 (19.9 years).
RSPS vs VTI growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 19.9 years both funds cover.
RSPS vs VTI Performance
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF (RSPS) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year RSPS returned +6.10% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, RSPS is up 6.57% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Over three years, RSPS compounded at +4.25% per year against +21.97% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +1.86% and +11.99% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +9.37% annualized vs +6.73%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.8% compared with 13.1% for RSPS. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -37.5% for RSPS and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RSPS charges 0.40% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $3 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RSPS currently yields 3.10% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
99.9% of RSPS's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 4.0% of VTI's money is in holdings RSPS also owns.
Most of RSPS is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
33 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in RSPS and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 74 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,123 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for RSPS (93.6% of the fund), and 1 for RSPS that do not appear in VTI (0.1%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in RSPS | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp. | 3.22% | 0.57% | 2.65% |
| WMTWalmart, Inc. | 3.11% | 0.62% | 2.49% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 3.21% | 0.46% | 2.75% |
| PMPhilip Morris International Inc. | 3.22% | 0.40% | 2.82% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 3.09% | 0.41% | 2.68% |
| KRKroger Co. | 3.31% | 0.04% | 3.27% |
| MOAltria Group Inc | 3.16% | 0.15% | 3.01% |
| MNSTMonster Beverage Corp. | 3.17% | 0.09% | 3.08% |
| TGTTARGET CORP | 3.13% | 0.10% | 3.03% |
| TSNTyson Foods Inc. Class A | 3.17% | 0.02% | 3.15% |
99.9% of RSPS is already inside VTI.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, RSPS or VTI?
RSPS has an expense ratio of 0.40% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $37 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, RSPS or VTI?
Over the past year RSPS returned +6.10% vs +16.63% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), RSPS annualized +6.73% vs +9.37% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, RSPS or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.8% annualized versus 13.1% for RSPS. Worst drawdown: RSPS -37.5% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both RSPS and VTI?
RSPS and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between RSPS and VTI?
99.9% of RSPS's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 4.0% of VTI's is in holdings RSPS also owns. They hold 33 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in RSPS and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, RSPS or VTI?
RSPS yields 3.10% while VTI yields 1.06%, so RSPS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than RSPS?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. RSPS is less concentrated, with 31.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.