FSTA vs. RSPS: Two Paths to Consumer Staples Exposure

The Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF ( features a much lower fee and much larger assets under management (AUM) than the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF (NYSEMKT:RSPS), but RSPS offers a higher yield and a more balanced approach to sector exposure.

Both FSTA and RSPS track U.S. consumer staples stocks, but their strategies and portfolio compositions differ meaningfully. This comparison unpacks their cost, performance, risk, and portfolio quirks to help investors decide which ETF may better suit their objectives.

Snapshot (cost & size)

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 far more affordable on fees, charging just 0.08% annually compared to 0.40% for RSPS, though RSPS may appeal to yield-seekers with its higher 2.9% dividend yield versus FSTA's 2.2% payout.

Performance & risk comparison

Metrics based on market close April 1st 2026

What's inside

FSTA tracks the MSCI USA IMI Consumer Staples 25/50 Index, spanning 104 holdings and covering nearly the entire U.S. consumer staples market. Its largest weights concentrate in Walmart Inc (NASDAQ:WMT) at 15.56%, Costco Wholesale Corp (NASDAQ:COST) at 12.30%, and Procter + Gamble Co. (NYSE:PG) at 9.15%, giving the fund a mega-cap tilt. The portfolio is overwhelmingly consumer defensive, with a minor allocation to consumer cyclical names, and has operated for over 12 years.

RSPS, in contrast, equally weights 35 S&P 500 consumer staples stocks, resulting in much smaller allocations to the sector giants and a flatter distribution across the group. Its top holdings, such as Brown-Forman Corp (BF-B), Tyson Foods Inc (NYSE:TSN), and Mondelez International Inc (NASDAQ:MDLZ), each account for around 3% of assets. This approach reduces single-stock concentration risk and may appeal to those seeking a more balanced sector play.

For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.

What this means for investors

Consumer staples is a defensive sector by nature — people keep buying groceries and household essentials even when they cut back everywhere else. When consumers trade down to cheaper options, retailers like Walmart and Costco that anchor FSTA tend to benefit directly. But for income-focused investors, RSPS's higher yield and flatter distribution across the sector offers a different kind of appeal — less dependent on a handful of giants and more exposed to the broader range of companies that make up everyday consumer spending. Both funds give you defensive sector exposure, but they get there very differently.

FSTA is essentially a bet on the giants. Walmart, Costco, and Procter & Gamble together make up more than a third of the fund, so you're getting broad sector exposure with a heavy lean toward companies that already dominate shelf space and consumer wallets. For most buy-and-hold investors, that concentration isn't a problem — those are durable businesses with long track records.

RSPS flips the logic. Equal weighting means Walmart sits alongside Tyson Foods or Brown-Forman at roughly the same allocation. That's a meaningfully different bet: you're owning the sector's mid-tier players with real weight behind them. The higher yield and higher fee both follow naturally from that construction. The practical question comes down to your priorities. FSTA is the lower-cost, simpler default. RSPS earns a look if you want higher income or sector exposure that doesn't hinge on two or three mega-caps.

Seena Hassouna has positions in Costco Wholesale. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Costco Wholesale and Walmart. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.