# Equal-Weight Nasdaq-100 & S&P 500 ETFs
**Query:** US-listed Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500 equal-weight ETFs compared by expense ratio and 1-year return
**Data as of:** 2026-10-07

Equal-weight US large-cap index ETFs as of October 7, 2026. Our curated universe contains two pure equal-weight index funds — RSP (S&P 500 Equal Weight) and QQQE (Nasdaq-100 Equal Weighted) — alongside their cap-weighted benchmarks QQQ and SPY for direct comparison. Both are plain, non-leveraged, non-inverse equity index ETFs. Ranked by lowest expense ratio: RSP is the cheapest equal-weight vehicle at 0.20%, while QQQE is the best 1Y performer among the equal-weight pair at +19.0%, ahead of RSP's +11.9%.

### Equal-Weight Index ETFs vs Cap-Weighted Benchmarks

| Symbol | Fund Name | Vehicle Type | Index Tracked | Expense Ratio | 1M Return | 3M Return | 6M Return | 1Y Return | AUM ($B) | % from 52W High | % above 150D SMA | Top 10 Holdings | Comments |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| SPY | State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust | Cap-weighted benchmark | S&P 500 (cap-weighted) | 0.09% | 1.72% | 3.65% | 15.55% | 16.97% | 783.7964 | -0.24% | 6.38% | NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, GOOGL, AVGO, GOOG, META, MU, TSLA | Cap-weighted reference point: the deepest liquidity and lowest cost of the group. Its return is the benchmark against which the equal-weight funds' tracking gap is measured — the wider that gap, the more concentrated the market has been. |
| QQQ | Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 | Cap-weighted benchmark | Nasdaq-100 (cap-weighted) | 0.18% | 5.59% | 4.87% | 25.29% | 25.27% | 493.9875 | -0.25% | 10.11% | NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, MU, AMZN, AMD, GOOGL, TSLA, GOOG, AVGO | Cap-weighted Nasdaq-100 benchmark. Its outperformance vs QQQE is the clearest illustration of mega-cap concentration: same constituents, very different weights, and the biggest names doing most of the work. |
| RSP | Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF | Equal-weight index fund | S&P 500 Equal Weight | 0.20% | -2.46% | -0.99% | 7.20% | 11.91% | 89.117 | -5.46% | 1.64% | MRNA, VEEV, ZBRA, CRL, DASH, CRM, GPN, PANW, EXPE, WDAY | The flagship equal-weight vehicle — huge asset base, penny-wide spreads and minimal closure risk. By construction it shuns mega-cap leadership and leans toward Financials, Industrials and Health Care, so it is the natural way to express a broadening-breadth view and has lagged badly in the current narrow tape. |
| QQQE | Direxion NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index ETF | Equal-weight index fund | Nasdaq-100 Equal Weighted | 0.35% | 1.90% | 1.24% | 19.74% | 18.95% | 1.3538 | -2.25% | 6.64% | DASH, ABNB, PANW, WDAY, PAYX, ROP, REGN, ADP, AMGN, CRWD | Keeps the Nasdaq-100 growth/tech character but strips out mega-cap dominance, blending in mid-cap Nasdaq names. That tilt explains its lead over RSP, but the small asset base relative to RSP means wider spreads and greater flow sensitivity. |

### Comparison Summary

## How to read this comparison

**Two equal-weight funds, two index families.** **QQQE** replicates the **Nasdaq-100 Equal Weighted** index and **RSP** replicates the **S&P 500 Equal Weight** index, so they are not substitutes for each other — QQQE keeps the Nasdaq-100's tech/growth orientation but dilutes concentration, while RSP spreads exposure across the entire S&P 500 and therefore carries a much larger financial, industrial and health-care tilt.

**Cheapest by cost:** RSP at **0.20%** — half the fee of QQQE (**0.35%**) — and it is roughly 60x larger by assets, which means tighter spreads, deeper liquidity and far less closure/flow risk.

**Best 1Y performer among the equal-weight pair:** QQQE at about **+19%**, versus RSP near **+12%**. That gap is a concentration story, not a skill story: the Nasdaq-100's innovative/growth names kept compounding, while RSP's equal weight forced it away from mega-cap leadership.

**Structural differences that drive the return gap.**

- **Equal vs cap weighting:** cap-weighted benchmarks (SPY, QQQ) let the largest winners dominate, so a narrow mega-cap-led tape favors them. Both RSP and QQQE were lagging their cap-weighted counterparts over 1Y — a textbook signature of a narrow market.
- **Sector tilts:** equal weighting systematically down-weights the biggest sectors and up-weights the rest. In this environment that means RSP carries meaningfully more Financials, Industrials, Health Care and Consumer Staples, while QQQE still leans heavily Technology/Communication — just with a fraction of the mega-cap weighting.
- **Rebalance / flow effects:** equal-weight funds must sell relative winners and buy laggards at each rebalance. That is a built-in contrarian, mean-reversion tilt that can add value over full cycles but creates higher turnover (RSP's trailing turnover is far above a cap-weighted fund) and trades like a mid-cap blend during rotations.
- **Market-cap character:** with equal weights, the smallest members carry the same influence as the largest, so these funds behave more like large-cap-blend with a mid-cap lean — they will generally lag in mega-cap-driven melt-ups and outperform in broadening markets.

**Bottom line:** RSP is the low-cost, liquid, broad-breadth expression of equal weighting; QQQE is the cheaper-concentration, tech-tilted Nasdaq-100 equal-weight play that has led on 1Y returns but costs more and holds far less assets. Note that other US-listed equal-weight vehicles (QQEW, EQWL, EUSA, GSEW, QEW and S&P 500 equal-weight style variants) exist but are outside this curated coverage, so the screen is limited to the two funds available here.

---
_Generated by Relaxfolio — investment opportunity discovery. A research starting point, not investment advice._