🏛️ Financial ETFs

The financial sector is one of the largest in the S&P 500, encompassing banks, insurers, asset managers, and more. But not all financial ETFs are created equal. The difference between cap-weighted XLF and equal-weighted RSPF can mean dramatically different exposure — and dramatically different returns depending on market conditions.

The Big Two: XLF vs RSPF

These are the core broad financial ETFs that most traders use. Understanding their differences is essential.

XLF — The Mega-Cap Play

XLF is market-cap weighted, which means the largest financial companies dominate. This creates significant concentration:

• Top 10 holdings: ~56% of the fund
• Berkshire, JPMorgan, Visa, Mastercard: The biggest weights
• Mix of subsectors: Banks, insurance, payment processors, asset managers

When to use XLF:

• You want liquid, low-cost financial exposure
• You believe mega-cap financials will continue leading
• You want diversification across financial subsectors
• You’re making tactical sector rotation trades

The risk: If mega-cap banks struggle (credit crisis, regulation), XLF feels it disproportionately.

RSPF — The Equal-Weight Alternative

RSPF is equal-weighted, giving every S&P 500 financial stock roughly the same weight regardless of market cap. This creates a fundamentally different exposure:

• Each stock: ~1.4% weight
• Quarterly rebalancing: Maintains equal weights
• Small/mid-cap tilt: Smaller financials have equal voice
• Higher turnover: 19% annually vs. 3% for XLF

When to use RSPF:

• You believe smaller financials will outperform mega-caps
• You want diversification away from concentration risk
• You expect mean reversion after mega-cap dominance
• You’re concerned about single-stock risk in top holdings

The trade-off: Higher expense ratio (0.40% vs. 0.08%) and lower liquidity.

Comparing XLF and RSPF

The RSPF/XLF Ratio — A Key Signal

The ratio of RSPF to XLF tells you whether smaller financials are leading or lagging:

• RSPF/XLF rising: Small/mid-cap financials outperforming — breadth expanding
• RSPF/XLF falling: Mega-caps leading — narrow leadership, concentration winning

This ratio often inflects at cycle turns. When mega-caps have dominated for extended periods, watch for RSPF/XLF to bottom and turn up — it can signal broadening participation.

Alternative Financial ETFs

Beyond XLF and RSPF, several alternatives offer different approaches:

VFH — The Broadest Exposure

VFH holds 400+ financial stocks, providing the most diversified exposure. It tracks the MSCI US IMI Financials 25/50 Index.

When to consider:

• You want maximum diversification within financials
• You believe small-cap financials will contribute
• Long-term buy-and-hold allocation

Trade-off: Slightly higher expense than XLF (0.09% vs. 0.08%).

IYF — The Mid-Cap Tilt

IYF tracks the Russell 1000 Financials, including mid-cap financial stocks that XLF excludes. This provides different factor exposure.

When to consider:

• You want mid-cap financial exposure
• You believe the Russell 1000 will outperform S&P 500 financials

Trade-off: Higher expense ratio (0.39%).

FNCL — The Low-Cost Alternative

FNCL matches XLF’s 0.08% expense ratio while tracking the MSCI USA IMI Financials Index. Similar to VFH but with Fidelity’s platform advantages.

When to consider: Fidelity account holders, cost-conscious investors.

Leveraged & Inverse Financial ETFs

3x Leveraged (Direxion)

FAS is one of the most actively traded leveraged ETFs in the financial sector. It provides 3x daily exposure to large-cap financial stocks.

Key mechanics:

• Daily reset: The 3x leverage resets daily, creating path dependency
• Volatility decay: In choppy markets, both FAS and FAZ can lose value
• Compounding: In strong trends, returns can exceed 3x; in reversals, losses compound
• Liquidity: FAS has ~$2.2B AUM; FAZ has ~$108M (much less liquid)

When traders use FAS/FAZ:

• Short-term directional bets on financials (days, not weeks)
• Hedging existing financial positions
• Trading around Fed announcements or earnings
• Playing yield curve steepening/flattening moves

2x Leveraged (ProShares)

The 2x products have less volatility decay than 3x but also less leverage. They track a different index (S&P Financial Select Sector) than the Direxion products.

When to prefer 2x over 3x:

• Holding period of 1-2 weeks (less decay)
• Lower risk tolerance
• Trading the same index as XLF

Leveraged ETF Decay — Why It Matters

Consider a simple example:

The index is down 1%, but FAS is down 9%. This is volatility decay in action. The more volatile the underlying, the worse the decay.

Rule of thumb: Only hold leveraged financial ETFs when you have high conviction on direction AND expect low volatility (steady trend).

Which ETF for which situation?

How do financial ETFs relate to each other?

The ETF Hierarchy

  flowchart TD
    A[**XLF / VFH**<br/>Cap-weighted, mega-cap focus] --> B[**RSPF**<br/>Equal-weight, diversified]
    B --> C[**FAS / UYG**<br/>Leveraged, short-term]
    
    A -.- D[Core exposure]
    B -.- E[Breadth play]
    C -.- F[Tactical trades only]

• XLF leads when mega-cap banks rally (Fed pivot, credit expansion)
• RSPF leads when breadth expands and smaller financials participate
• Leveraged ETFs amplify moves but decay over time

Key Ratios to Monitor

Quick reference

Related pages

Sources