ACES vs. RFDA
ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACES is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index, while RFDA is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by SS&C. ACES is passively managed, while RFDA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACES returned -8.07%/yr vs 13.55%/yr for RFDA. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACES charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.
Performance
ACES vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACES achieves a 32.49% return, which is significantly higher than RFDA's 12.43% return.
ACES
- 1D
- 2.95%
- 1M
- 20.25%
- YTD
- 32.49%
- 6M
- 32.78%
- 1Y
- 80.47%
- 3Y*
- -0.25%
- 5Y*
- -8.07%
- 10Y*
- —
RFDA
- 1D
- 1.09%
- 1M
- 4.24%
- YTD
- 12.43%
- 6M
- 13.60%
- 1Y
- 31.78%
- 3Y*
- 19.55%
- 5Y*
- 13.55%
- 10Y*
- —
ACES vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF | 32.49% | 25.44% | -26.71% | -20.04% | -28.44% | -19.44% | 140.33% | 51.70% | -9.63% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 12.43% | 16.42% | 20.12% | 16.98% | -8.58% | 25.94% | 11.26% | 27.15% | -12.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACES and RFDA is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018 | 0.61 |
The correlation between ACES and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
ACES vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ACES
RFDA
Utilities
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
ACES
RFDA
Technology
ACES
RFDA
Industrials
ACES
RFDA
Consumer Cyclical
ACES
RFDA
Basic Materials
ACES
RFDA
Financial Services
ACES
RFDA
Consumer Defensive
ACES
RFDA
Energy
ACES
RFDA
Communication Services
ACES
-
RFDA
Healthcare
ACES
-
RFDA
Real Estate
ACES
-
RFDA
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
ACES vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank
ACES
RFDA
ACES vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). 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.
| ACES | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.51 | 2.75 | -0.25 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.09 | 3.78 | -0.69 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.51 | -0.14 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.47 | 5.91 | -1.44 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.30 | 21.66 | -10.36 |
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
| ACES | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.51 | 2.75 | -0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.22 | 0.87 | -1.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.23 | 0.80 | -0.57 |
Drawdowns
ACES vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACES drawdown since its inception was -79.05%, which is greater than RFDA's maximum drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACES and RFDA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACES | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.05% | -34.60% | -44.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.44% | -5.45% | -11.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -58.68% | -19.35% | -39.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -74.44% | -19.35% | -55.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -55.14% | 0.00% | -55.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -38.86% | -3.75% | -35.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.91% | 1.49% | +5.42% |
Volatility
ACES vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a higher volatility of 9.41% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.67%. This indicates that ACES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RFDA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACES | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.41% | 2.67% | +6.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.55% | 8.41% | +14.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.32% | 11.60% | +20.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.15% | 15.73% | +20.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.58% | 16.85% | +18.73% |
ACES vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACES has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACES vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison
ACES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than RFDA's 1.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF | 0.53% | 0.70% | 1.10% | 1.44% | 1.08% | 0.71% | 0.56% | 1.79% | 0.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 1.76% | 1.89% | 2.23% | 2.68% | 3.57% | 1.44% | 1.62% | 1.87% | 2.44% | 1.90% | 0.98% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACES and RFDA have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACES has higher volatility (9.41%) compared to RFDA (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACES dropped -79.05% vs RFDA's -34.60%.
On 5-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.55% vs -8.07% for ACES. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 13.55% return vs -8.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ACES.
RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.76%, compared with 0.53% for ACES.
ACES is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while RFDA is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ACES and 0.52% for RFDA.
RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.75 vs 2.51), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ACES and RFDA
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