FSTA vs RSPS: A Defensive ETF Dilemma

by

Right. So, the market. Honestly, it’s exhausting. All those charts and numbers. It’s enough to make one long for a simpler life… like, say, being a shepherdess. But no, I’m supposed to be building wealth. Apparently, that involves comparing ETFs. Specifically, the Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) and the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Staples ETF (RSPS). It’s a bit like choosing between two shades of beige, isn’t it? But apparently, beige can make or break your portfolio. Who knew?

Both of these funds are aiming for the same thing: a slice of the ‘consumer staples’ pie. You know, the stuff people buy even when everything’s going horribly wrong – toilet paper, coffee, slightly depressing biscuits. It’s a sensible strategy, I suppose. Though it does make one feel a bit… fatalistic. Like preparing for the apocalypse, one tin of beans at a time.

Here’s the breakdown, as near as I can manage. It’s all a bit overwhelming, frankly.

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

Units of Cryptocurrency Lost: 0 (a minor miracle). Hours Spent Staring at Tables: 4. Number of Times I Considered a Career Change to Alpaca Farming: 2. The expense ratio, though. That’s the bit that really gets me. FSTA is practically giving the money away at 0.08%. RSPS, at 0.40%, feels… greedy. It’s not a huge amount, of course. But it adds up. It’s like paying a small toll every time you try to build a fortune. And honestly, I’m starting to feel rather toll-ed.

FSTA, it seems, is the champion of affordability. Which is nice. Though it’s also a bit… boring. RSPS, on the other hand, is trying to be clever with its ‘equal weighting’ strategy. It’s spreading the love (and the risk) around. It’s like trying to make everyone at a party feel equally important. Which, let’s be honest, is rarely successful.

Here’s another table, because apparently, I enjoy inflicting data on unsuspecting readers:

Metric RSPS FSTA
Max drawdown (5 y) (18.6%) (16.6%)
Growth of $1,000 over 5 years $1,245 $1,584

Five years. It feels like a lifetime ago. I was a different person then. Less stressed, possibly. Definitely had more hair. Anyway, FSTA seems to have outperformed RSPS over the long haul. Which is reassuring. Though past performance, as they say, is not necessarily indicative of future results. It’s a disclaimer designed to protect them, and induce existential dread in me.

Inside FSTA, you’ll find a lot of familiar names: Walmart, Costco, Procter & Gamble. The usual suspects. It’s a bit like walking into a supermarket. Comforting, but hardly exciting. RSPS, meanwhile, is a bit more diverse. Bunge Global SA, Colgate-Palmolive, Church & Dwight. It’s like a slightly more obscure supermarket. Still selling necessities, but with a slightly more adventurous vibe.

So, what does it all mean? Well, both funds offer a safe haven in a turbulent world. They’re the financial equivalent of a warm blanket and a cup of tea. But FSTA is the more efficient blanket. It keeps you just as warm, but costs less to heat. RSPS, on the other hand, is the slightly more stylish blanket. It might not be as practical, but it looks better on the sofa.

Ultimately, it comes down to priorities. If you’re a ruthless cost-cutter, FSTA is the obvious choice. If you’re a bit of a maverick, RSPS might appeal. Me? I’m torn. I want the cheapest option, but I also want to feel like I’m making a sophisticated investment. It’s a constant struggle. And honestly, I think I need a lie-down.

Number of Times I’ve Considered Selling Everything and Buying a Small Island: 1. Current State of Emotional Wellbeing: Precarious. Must. Resist. Impulse. To. Adopt. A. Miniature. Donkey.

Read More

2026-02-15 02:13