The Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (NYSEMKT:FSTA) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF (NYSEMKT:RSPS) differ most in cost and portfolio concentration: RSPS follows an equal-weight strategy, while FSTA charges a much lower fee while emphasizing sector giants.
NYSEMKT: FSTA
Key Data Points
Both ETFs target the U.S. consumer staples sector, but their approaches and price points differ meaningfully. This comparison explores their cost structures, risk profiles, recent performance, and portfolio construction to help investors weigh which ETF may appeal for defensive exposure.
Snapshot (cost & size)
| Metric | RSPS | FSTA |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Invesco | Fidelity |
| Expense ratio | 0.40% | 0.08% |
| 1-yr return (as of 2026-02-13) | 14.9% | 10.7% |
| Dividend yield | 2.5% | 2.0% |
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.64 |
| AUM | $264 million | $1.4 billion |
Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500; beta is calculated from five-year monthly returns. The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months.
FSTA is notably more affordable, charging just 0.08% annually compared to RSPS’s 0.40%, and its dividend yield is modestly lower at 2.0% versus 2.5% for RSPS.
Performance & risk comparison
| Metric | RSPS | FSTA |
|---|---|---|
| Max drawdown (5 y) | (18.6%) | (16.6%) |
| Growth of $1,000 over 5 years | $1,245 | $1,584 |
What's inside
FSTA tracks the performance of the MSCI USA IMI Consumer Staples Index and holds 97 stocks, with 99% of its assets allocated to consumer staples names. The fund is over 12 years old and heavily weighted toward large sector leaders, with Walmart (WMT +0.99%), Costco Wholesale (COST +1.27%), and Procter & Gamble (PG 1.16%) together making up over one-third of assets.
NYSEMKT: RSPS
Key Data Points
RSPS, in contrast, equally weights 38 stocks from the S&P 500, resulting in less concentration risk. Top holdings include Bunge Global SA (BG +3.16%), Colgate-Palmolive (CL 1.16%), and Church & Dwight. (CHD +1.42%) Each is around 3% of the portfolio. RSPS’s approach spreads sector exposure more evenly and avoids outsize bets on mega-cap staples. Neither fund employs leverage, hedging, or ESG screens.
For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the complete guide at this link.
What this means for investors
Both funds offer exposure to consumer staples that are historically viewed as defensive against market volatility or economic softness. These ETFs provide exposure to the essentials that consumers buy every day, such as food and cleaning supplies.
FSTA is clearly going to save investors money on fees over the long term. Its 0.08% expense ratio is close to rock bottom, while RSPS’s higher 0.40% expense ratio is relatively high. This is not much in one year, but it can add up over a decade or more.
FSTA’s significant outperformance over the past five years makes its lower expense ratio an even better deal. RSPS has trailed FSTA by over 30 percentage points over that stretch, which doesn’t justify its higher cost.
RSPS’s main advantage is dividend yield, but a higher expense ratio mostly offsets the 0.50% higher yield over FSTA.
One reason FSTA has performed so well, however, has been its concentration in Costco and Walmart, which have performed well. These are quality companies, but having over 20% of the fund in these two stocks could potentially lead to higher volatility.
The difference in concentration will likely be a deciding factor for investors. Investors looking for greater stability and safety may opt for RSPS’s equal-weighted strategy.
