Invesco Equally Weighted S&P 500 Fund – Morningstar Rating, Analysis & Key Insights

Safdar meyka
Nov 10
4 min read

Introduction

You’re scanning through investment options and you come across something called the “Invesco Equally Weighted S&P 500 Fund Morningstar” review. You pause and wonder: what exactly is this? How is it different from a regular S&P 500 fund? And how does the Morningstar rating or analysis come into play? This article will walk you through that in simple terms, so you can understand whether this fund might fit your portfolio.

What is the fund about?

When you dig in, the fund in question is the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (ticker RSP) or its equivalent share classes that track an equally weighted version of the S&P 500 index. According to Morningstar, the fund holds all or most of the S&P 500 stocks but gives each one the same weight rather than weighting by market size.

In plain English: instead of letting the biggest companies dominate the fund, each company has equal “say” in the index. This can mean less dominance by big tech firms and more diversification.

Why does equal‑weighting matter?

So you’re in a discussion with a friend, and you ask: “Why is equal‑weighting worth paying attention to?”

First, it reduces concentration risk. In a normal S&P 500 fund, a few giant tech companies can dominate returns. With equal‐weighting, that dominance is reduced.
Second, it can shift exposure toward smaller large‑cap companies and industries that might be undervalued.
Third, it introduces more volatility in some cases, because smaller holdings can move more. The trade‑off: potential for more balanced growth, but more ups and downs.

What does Morningstar say?

When you look up “Invesco Equally Weighted S&P 500 Fund Morningstar”, you’ll find data from the analyst firm Morningstar, Inc.. For example:

The ETF version has an expense ratio around 0.20%.
Morningstar assigns pillar ratings like People, Process, Parent. In one share class the People pillar was “Above Average”, Process “Average”.
If you search for the exact share class you’re investing in, you’ll need to check Morningstar’s star rating or medalist rating for that share.

Example: How it behaves in real markets

Let’s say in one year the tech‑heavy index rallies because the big firms boom. With the equal‑weight fund, those big firms have less pull, so the fund might lag or lead depending on market phases. In fact:

A MarketWatch article noted that the equal‐weight ETF briefly beat the traditional S&P 500 in early 2025 (3.4% vs. 2.7%) but still had risks because it had more exposure to cyclical and rate‑sensitive sectors.
Another article noted that investors poured billions into the equal‐weight fund as concerns over tech concentration rose. So this shows how the fund’s structure impacts its real‐world behavior.

How to interpret the Morningstar rating here

When you’re looking at the “Invesco Equally Weighted S&P 500 Fund Morningstar” page, here are things you should check:

Expense ratio: Lower is generally better for indexing.
Pillar ratings: People, Process, Parent – all matter.
Star/Medalist rating: Helps summarize analyst view.
Risk metrics: Because this style may carry more risk.

Who might this fund suit?

If you are thinking: “Could this fund make sense for me?”, then:

It may suit you if you’re concerned that large tech stocks dominate your portfolio and you want more broad diversification.
It may suit you if you’re comfortable with some extra volatility in exchange for a less concentrated index.
It may suit you if you like the concept of “every company gets a fair share” in the index. But it might be less good if you:
Prefer minimal volatility and stable returns.
Want skinny index cost and are comfortable with large‑cap dominance.

What to watch out for

When evaluating this fund, keep an eye on:

Sector shifts: Because equal‐weighting can boost sectors that were previously small in cap‐weighted index.
Performance in different market cycles: It may outperform when big tech falters, but could lag when tech leads strongly.
Costs: Even though 0.20% is low, make sure you compare to alternatives.
Morningstar insights: Read their commentary beyond just the number of stars.

Quick bullet summary

The fund tracks an equally weighted version of the S&P 500 rather than market‑cap weighted.
According to Morningstar, it has reasonable costs and solid people ratings.
It reduces dominance of the largest firms and can give more exposure to smaller large‑caps.
It comes with higher risk of volatility and may perform differently across market cycles.
Use Morningstar’s full report (People, Process, Parent pillars) to form your view.
Ask yourself whether you prefer diversification over concentration, and whether you can live with ups and downs.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Is this the same as a “normal” S&P 500 fund? A: No. A typical S&P 500 fund weights companies by market size. The equal‐weight version treats each company evenly. Q: Does Morningstar rate it “top tier”? A: The rating varies by share class and region; you’ll need to check the exact one you’re looking at. For example research shows People pillar “Above Average”.

Q: Will equal‐weighting always win? A: No. Performance depends on which companies/sectors lead. Equal‐weighting may help when big firms stumble, but may lag when they lead strongly.

Final Thoughts

If you are looking into the “Invesco Equally Weighted S&P 500 Fund Morningstar” discussion, you’re really exploring an alternative way to play the S&P 500 – one that gives every company equal footing and leans into diversification rather than dominance. The Morningstar rating and associated data help you evaluate whether that structure fits your goals, risk appetite and cost‑sensitivity.

If you’re worried about a few mega‑cap stocks dominating your portfolio, and you’re willing to accept a little more volatility for a more level playing field, then this fund could be a compelling option to discuss further. On the other hand, if you prefer stability or minimal deviation from the “traditional” index, you might choose a market‑cap weighted S&P 500 fund instead.