
iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF has a lower expense ratio and much larger assets under management than Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF.
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF provides a higher dividend yield but has significantly underperformed on a total-return basis over the last year.
iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF is highly concentrated in its top holdings, while the Invesco fund maintains an equal-weighted approach across the sector.
The iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF (NYSEMKT:IYK) and the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF (NYSEMKT:RSPS) offer distinct exposures to defensive stocks, with the iShares fund emphasizing market-cap leaders while the Invesco fund equalizes its holdings.
Investors often look to the consumer staples sector for defensive positioning and reliable dividends during periods of economic uncertainty. Both the iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF and the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF target this industry, but they employ very different indexing strategies. This comparison explores how their differing weighting methodologies impact concentration, yield, and historical performance.
| Metric | RSPS | IYK |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Invesco | iShares |
| Share price | $29.00 (as of 2026-10-06) | $71.98 (as of 2026-10-06) |
| Expense ratio | 0.40% | 0.37% |
| 1-yr total return (as of 2026-10-06) | 2.70% | 9.71% |
| Dividend yield | 3.06% | 2.62% |
| Beta | 0.52 | 0.43 |
| AUM | $424.8M | $1.6B |
Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500; beta is calculated from monthly returns over the available fund history (up to five years). The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months. Dividend yield is the trailing-12-month distribution yield.
The iShares fund is slightly more affordable with a 0.37% expense ratio compared to 0.40% for the Invesco fund. However, the Invesco fund offers a higher payout, providing a 3.1% yield against 2.6% for its counterpart.
| Metric | RSPS | IYK |
|---|---|---|
| Max drawdown (5 yr) | (18.6%) | (15.0%) |
| Growth of $1,000 over 5 years (total return) | $1,063 | $1,343 |
The iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF has a sector breakdown of 83% consumer defensive, 13% healthcare, and 3% basic materials. Its largest positions include Procter & Gamble at 13.7%, Coca-Cola at 13.3%, and Philip Morris International at 11.8% across 54 holdings. It was launched in 2000. iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF has paid $1.89 per share over the trailing 12 months, which, on its recent ~$71.62 share price, works out to a 2.6% yield.
The Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF tracks an equal-weighted version of its sector, holding 34 stocks with a 98% tilt toward consumer defensive and 2% in consumer cyclical names. Its top holdings include Procter & Gamble at 3.2%, Kroger at 3.1%, and Costco Wholesale at 3.1%. It was launched in 2006. Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF has paid $0.89 per share over the trailing 12 months, which, at its recent ~$28.78 share price, works out to a 3.1% yield.
For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.
The iShares looks like the more resilient consumer staple fund. It has delivered superior five-year returns, with a lower drawdown. Plus, it has more assets under management and has continued to outperform over the past year.
The RSPS has barely budged in value since 2021, while IYK has increased by about 34% in total, including dividend reinvestment. The past five years are a good barometer for measuring a consumer staple ETF's performance, since it includes one bear market (2022) and a recent stretch of choppy consumer spending amid higher inflation.
Through all that uncertainty, the iShares U.S. Consumer Staples ETF has come out ahead, making it the better long-term hold across market cycles.
John Ballard has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Costco Wholesale. The Motley Fool recommends Kroger and Philip Morris International. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.