FSTA Offers Lower Fees While RSPS Pays Higher Dividends

The Motley Fool

by newsfeedback@fool.com (John Ballard)

February 14, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

Fidelity’s FSTA ETF offers lower fees compared to Invesco’s RSPS ETF, making it an attractive option for investors prioritizing cost efficiency in the consumer staples sector. While FSTA emphasizes large-cap companies known for stability and market dominance, RSPS employs an equal-weight strategy that spreads investments evenly across all holdings, potentially offering higher dividends but with a more diversified portfolio. This distinction in approach caters to different investment strategies: FSTA suits those seeking concentrated exposure to sector giants, while RSPS appeals to those looking for balanced risk and income generation. The cost structures of these ETFs are notably different. FSTA charges an annual fee of 0.14%, making it one of the cheapest options in its category, which can significantly impact long-term returns, especially over compounding periods. On the other hand, RSPS has a higher expense ratio of 0.25%. This difference highlights the importance for investors to consider fees when evaluating ETF performance, as lower costs can translate into higher net returns over time. Both ETFs target the U.S. consumer staples sector, known for its defensive characteristics and steady demand during economic downturns. However, their portfolio compositions differ: FSTA holds fewer, larger companies, such as Procter & Gamble and Coca-Cola, which may result in higher volatility but also the potential for outsized returns if these market leaders perform well. In contrast, RSPS’s equal-weight approach reduces concentration risk by spreading investments across a broader range of companies, potentially offering more balanced performance. Beta, a measure of an ETF’s volatility relative to the S&P 500, is another key factor. FSTA has a beta of 1.03, indicating it tends to move in line with the market, while RSPS has a slightly lower beta of 0.98, suggesting it may be marginally less volatile. This difference in risk profiles could influence investor decisions based on their tolerance for market fluctuations. For investors focused on defensive strategies and dividend income, both ETFs offer compelling features. F

Verticals

financeinvesting

Originally published on The Motley Fool on 2/14/2026