ACGR vs. RFDA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ACGR (American Century Large Cap Growth ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ACGR is passively managed, while RFDA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACGR returned 15.06%/yr vs 13.17%/yr for RFDA. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACGR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.

Performance

ACGR vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACGR achieves a 7.39% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 11.40% return.

ACGR

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: 6.10%
• YTD: 7.39%
• 6M: 6.90%
• 1Y: 24.19%
• 3Y*: 21.44%
• 5Y*: 15.06%
• 10Y*: —

RFDA

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: 4.27%
• YTD: 11.40%
• 6M: 12.25%
• 1Y: 29.49%
• 3Y*: 19.19%
• 5Y*: 13.17%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACGR vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF	7.39%	14.50%	26.66%	43.24%	-30.13%	39.24%	11.27%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	11.40%	16.42%	20.12%	16.98%	-8.58%	25.94%	8.97%

Correlation

The correlation between ACGR and RFDA is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2020	0.68

The correlation between ACGR and RFDA shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (all time) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ACGR vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACGR

ACGR Risk / Return Rank: 40
ACGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
ACGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
ACGR Omega Ratio Rank: 43
ACGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
ACGR Martin Ratio Rank: 34

RFDA

RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 83
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 79
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 89

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACGR vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) 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.

	ACGR	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.55	-0.98
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.17	3.52	-1.35
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.47	-0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.53	5.44	-3.90
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.20	19.87	-14.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACGR vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACGR Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACGR and RFDA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ACGR	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	2.55	-0.98
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70	0.84	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.79	-0.10

Drawdowns

ACGR vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACGR drawdown since its inception was -34.54%, roughly equal to the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACGR and RFDA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACGR	RFDA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.54%	-34.60%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.84%	-5.45%	-10.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.58%	-19.35%	-5.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.54%	-19.35%	-15.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.68%	-0.92%	-0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.50%	-3.74%	-4.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.66%	1.49%	+3.17%

Volatility

ACGR vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) has a higher volatility of 3.65% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.66%. This indicates that ACGR'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.

Volatility by Period

	ACGR	RFDA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.65%	2.66%	+0.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.95%	8.47%	+3.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.49%	11.64%	+3.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.51%	15.73%	+5.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.42%	16.85%	+4.57%

ACGR vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACGR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACGR vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

ACGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than RFDA's 1.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF	0.09%	0.11%	0.23%	0.37%	0.48%	0.58%	1.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	1.77%	1.89%	2.23%	2.68%	3.57%	1.44%	1.62%	1.87%	2.44%	1.90%	0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACGR and RFDA in my portfolio?

ACGR and RFDA have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ACGR or RFDA?

ACGR has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACGR dropped -34.54% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

Which ETF is better, ACGR or RFDA?

On 5-year performance, ACGR leads with 15.06% vs 13.17% for RFDA. On fees, ACGR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 2.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACGR or RFDA?

Over the 5-year period, ACGR has performed better with a 15.06% return vs 13.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACGR or RFDA?

ACGR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACGR or RFDA?

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.09% for ACGR.

What is the main difference between ACGR and RFDA?

They also come from different issuers: American Century and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ACGR and 0.52% for RFDA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.57), 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.