ABCS vs. AAUS
ABCS (Alpha Blue Capital US Small-Mid Cap Dynamic ETF) and AAUS (Alpha Architect US Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ABCS is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the BNY Mellon ABC Index, while AAUS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. ABCS is passively managed, while AAUS is actively managed. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ABCS charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for AAUS.
Performance
ABCS vs. AAUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ABCS achieves a 7.49% return, which is significantly lower than AAUS's 10.30% return.
ABCS
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- 2.12%
- YTD
- 7.49%
- 6M
- 9.46%
- 1Y
- 18.74%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AAUS
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 5.19%
- YTD
- 10.30%
- 6M
- 10.39%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ABCS vs. AAUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ABCS Alpha Blue Capital US Small-Mid Cap Dynamic ETF | 7.49% | 3.64% |
AAUS Alpha Architect US Equity ETF | 10.30% | 9.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between ABCS and AAUS is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2025 | 0.62 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ABCS vs. AAUS — Risk / Return Rank
ABCS
AAUS
ABCS vs. AAUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Blue Capital US Small-Mid Cap Dynamic ETF (ABCS) and Alpha Architect US Equity ETF (AAUS). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| ABCS | AAUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.39 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.08 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.21 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.95 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ABCS | AAUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.39 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.78 | 2.00 | -1.22 |
Drawdowns
ABCS vs. AAUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ABCS drawdown since its inception was -20.52%, which is greater than AAUS's maximum drawdown of -9.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABCS and AAUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ABCS | AAUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.52% | -9.13% | -11.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.33% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.54% | -1.31% | -2.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.64% | — | — |
Volatility
ABCS vs. AAUS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ABCS | AAUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.71% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.26% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.59% | 12.45% | +1.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.10% | 12.45% | +4.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.10% | 12.45% | +4.65% |
ABCS vs. AAUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
ABCS has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is higher than AAUS's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
ABCS vs. AAUS - Dividend Comparison
ABCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, more than AAUS's 0.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
AAUS Alpha Architect US Equity ETF | 0.33% | 0.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ABCS Alpha Blue Capital US Small-Mid Cap Dynamic ETF | 1.25% | 1.37% | 1.39% | 0.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ABCS and AAUS have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AAUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AAUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for ABCS.
ABCS has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.33% for AAUS.
ABCS is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while AAUS is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for ABCS and 0.15% for AAUS.
Find the right allocation for ABCS and AAUS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer