Equal-Weight S&P 500 (RSP) vs Nasdaq 100 (QQQ): The Equal-Weight Hub
RSP closed at $200.17 on April 29, 2026 with $87.10 billion in assets under management. QQQ traded at $657.55 with the Magnificent Seven representing approximately 40 percent of QQQ versus only 1.3 percent of RSP.
Also known as: S&P 500 Equal Weight (RSP) (ETF_RSP, equal weight) · Nasdaq 100 ETF (QQQ) (ETF_QQQ, Nasdaq, NDX)
Why This Comparison Matters
RSP closed at $200.17 on April 29, 2026 with $87.10 billion in assets under management. QQQ traded at $657.55 with the Magnificent Seven representing approximately 40 percent of QQQ versus only 1.3 percent of RSP. The same seven mega-cap tech names dominate 33 percent of SPY (cap-weighted S&P 500) but only 1.3 percent of RSP. Through the first four months of 2026, RSP has outpaced SPY by approximately 5 percentage points, the cleanest evidence in five years that the structural rotation away from mega-cap-tech concentration has begun. This hub page covers RSP comprehensively against QQQ, SPY, DIA, IWM, EFA, and EEM in dedicated sections, capturing the breadth-versus-concentration story across multiple counterparties.
The April 2026 Snapshot: RSP $200.17 vs QQQ $657.55
RSP closed at $200.17 on April 29, 2026 with assets under management of $87.10 billion as of April 14, 2026 and an expense ratio of 0.20 percent annually. QQQ closed at approximately $657.55 the same day with the Magnificent Seven representing approximately 40 percent of fund weight. SPY traded at approximately $712 with the same Magnificent Seven names representing approximately 33 percent of SPY weight versus only 1.3 percent in RSP.
Year-to-date 2026 performance shows RSP +1 percent through late March (when SPY was -4 percent), with RSP outpacing SPY by approximately 5 percentage points through mid-April 2026. This is the largest sustained RSP-versus-SPY outperformance in 5 years, suggesting either the start of a multi-year mega-cap-fatigue cycle or a temporary factor-flow reversion. The April 2026 setup also has DIA at approximately $488.67, IWM at $270.95, EFA at approximately $100-104, and EEM at $62.67. The full RSP comparison universe is captured below in dedicated sections.
Why Equal-Weight Matters: 33% of SPY in 7 Stocks
The structural argument for equal-weight equity exposure begins with concentration math. As of February 2026, the top 10 companies in SPY represented approximately 39 percent of total market capitalization. The Magnificent Seven (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Nvidia, Meta, Tesla) represented approximately 33 percent of SPY weight. In RSP, each of the 500 constituents holds approximately 0.2 percent weight, meaning the Mag-7 collectively represents only 1.3 percent of fund weight (7 stocks at 0.2 percent each).
The consequence: SPY direction is now disproportionately determined by mega-cap-tech earnings and AI-cycle sentiment. Just 2 percent of S&P 500 constituents (the top 10 names) determine over 30 percent of SPY direction, a level of concentration last seen in 1999 to 2000. RSP eliminates this dynamic by mechanical quarterly rebalancing back to equal weight. The structural concentration argument has held since the 1970s but only became materially relevant for performance after 2014, when mega-cap tech began outperforming sustainedly.
RSP vs QQQ: The Tech-Concentration Test
QQQ holds the Nasdaq 100 with approximately 40 percent weight in the Magnificent Seven plus another 15 to 20 percent in semiconductors and other tech-adjacent names. RSP holds 500 names equally weighted across all sectors. The pair captures the cleanest single-pair test of "is mega-cap tech concentration driving the market".
Conditional Forward Response (Tail Events)
How Nasdaq 100 ETF (QQQ) has historically behaved in the 5 sessions following a top-decile or bottom-decile daily move in S&P 500 Equal Weight (RSP). Computed from 1,281 aligned daily observations ending .
Following these triggers, Nasdaq 100 ETF (QQQ) falls 0.00% on average over the next 5 sessions, versus an unconditional baseline of +0.29%. 128 qualifying events; Nasdaq 100 ETF (QQQ) closed positive in 57% of them.
90-Day Statistics
Explore Each Metric
Related Scenarios & Forecasts
Get daily macro analysis comparing key metrics delivered to your inbox. Stay ahead of market-moving divergences.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is RSP's YTD performance versus SPY in 2026?+
RSP has outpaced SPY by approximately 5 percentage points year-to-date through mid-April 2026, the largest sustained outperformance in 5 years. RSP returned approximately +6 percent YTD versus SPY at -2 percent. The reversal reflects mega-cap-tech earnings deceleration (15 to 20 percent year-over-year vs peak 50+ percent in 2023), AI capex margin compression, and broader sector earnings strength in industrials, financials, and energy that RSP overweights vs SPY.
How concentrated is SPY in the Magnificent Seven?+
As of early 2026, the Magnificent Seven (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Nvidia, Meta, Tesla) represent approximately 33 percent of SPY weight. The top 10 companies represent approximately 39 percent of total market capitalization. Just 2 percent of S&P 500 constituents (the top 10 names) determine over 30 percent of SPY direction. In RSP, the same Magnificent Seven represent only 1.3 percent of weight (each of 500 stocks at approximately 0.2 percent).
Has RSP outperformed SPY since inception?+
Yes, modestly. From RSP's April 2003 inception through end-2024, compounded annualized return was approximately 11.0 percent for RSP versus 10.5 percent for SPY, a 50 basis point annual edge. But the path was extremely uneven: RSP outperformed substantially 2003 to 2007 (approximately 80 pp cumulative), slightly outperformed 2008 to 2014, then dramatically underperformed 2014 to 2024 (approximately 80 pp cumulative underperformance). The long-term edge reflects the equal-weight rebalance benefit minus higher expense ratio (0.20 percent vs SPY 0.09 percent).
Related Comparisons
Explore Across Convex
Data sourced from FRED, CoinGecko, CBOE, and other providers. This page is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results.