The Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA 0.22%) and the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF (RSPS 1.33%) both target U.S. consumer staples stocks, but they take different approaches.
FSTA tracks a market-cap-weighted index, heavily favoring the sector’s largest players, while RSPS equally weights all S&P 500 consumer staples constituents. This comparison unpacks cost, returns, risk, and portfolio makeup to help investors weigh which approach aligns with their goals.
Snapshot (cost & size)
| Metric | RSPS | FSTA |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Invesco | Fidelity |
| Expense ratio | 0.40% | 0.08% |
| 1-yr return (as of Feb. 11, 2026) | 12.60% | 8.73% |
| Dividend yield | 2.63% | 2.18% |
| AUM | $250 million | $1.4 billion |
| Beta (5Y monthly) | 0.61 | 0.64 |
Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500. The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months.
FSTA is notably more affordable on fees, with a much lower expense ratio. RSPS edges out FSTA on yield, however, which could appeal to those looking for greater dividend income.
Performance & risk comparison
| Metric | RSPS | FSTA |
|---|---|---|
| Max drawdown (5 y) | -18.61% | -16.57% |
| Growth of $1,000 over 5 years | $1,081 | $1,380 |
What's inside
FSTA tracks the MSCI USA IMI Consumer Staples 25/50 Index and holds 96 stocks, offering broad exposure to the consumer defensive sector. Its top holdings — Costco Wholesale, Walmart, and Procter & Gamble — make up over a third of the fund, reflecting a heavy concentration in household names. FSTA was launched over 12 years ago, supporting its credibility as a core sector ETF.
RSPS, by contrast, strictly sticks to S&P 500 consumer staples stocks, allocating equal weight to 36 holdings. This equal-weighting approach reduces single-stock risk but increases exposure to mid-cap names relative to FSTA’s large-cap tilt. Both ETFs are free of leverage, currency hedging, or ESG overlays.
For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.
What this means for investors
Both RSPS and FSTA provide exposure to the consumer staples industry, but each has a unique set of advantages and drawbacks.
FSTA relies heavily on major industry players, with its top three stocks accounting for more than one-third of its portfolio. Meanwhile, each of RSPS’s holdings comprises around 3% of assets.
This approach can set FSTA up for higher long-term returns if its top stocks thrive, but it could also be vulnerable to deeper downturns if those companies falter. RSPS’s equal-weight strategy can help protect it against single-stock risk, while also limiting its earning potential when strong stocks are given the same weight as weaker holdings.
Fees are another important factor to consider. Investors can expect to pay $8 per year in fees for every $10,000 invested in FSTA, compared to $40 per year for RSPS. It may not seem like a significant difference on the surface, but it could add up to thousands of dollars in fees for long-term investors with substantial account balances.
