ACVF vs. VOTE

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

ACVF (American Conservative Values ETF) and VOTE (Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ACVF is actively managed, while VOTE is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ACVF returned 19.83%/yr vs 23.10%/yr for VOTE. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. ACVF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for VOTE.

Performance

ACVF vs. VOTE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) and Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (VOTE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACVF achieves a 11.18% return, which is significantly lower than VOTE's 11.81% return.

ACVF

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 6.31%
• YTD: 11.18%
• 6M: 12.23%
• 1Y: 21.98%
• 3Y*: 19.83%
• 5Y*: 12.66%
• 10Y*: —

VOTE

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 5.53%
• YTD: 11.81%
• 6M: 12.15%
• 1Y: 29.73%
• 3Y*: 23.10%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ACVF vs. VOTE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ACVF American Conservative Values ETF	11.18%	13.67%	20.56%	23.81%	-15.74%	13.51%
VOTE Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF	11.81%	17.95%	25.23%	27.60%	-19.74%	12.08%

Correlation

The correlation between ACVF and VOTE is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2021	0.96

The correlation between ACVF and VOTE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACVF vs. VOTE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACVF	VOTE
Technology	39.7%	35.5%
Financial Services	11.6%	11.7%
Industrials	11.0%	8.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	10.2%
Healthcare	8.1%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.9%	4.8%
Communication Services	4.2%	11.3%
Energy	3.5%	3.6%
Utilities	2.2%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.6%	1.8%

Return for Risk

ACVF vs. VOTE — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACVF

ACVF Risk / Return Rank: 58
ACVF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
ACVF Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ACVF Omega Ratio Rank: 55
ACVF Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
ACVF Martin Ratio Rank: 63

VOTE

VOTE Risk / Return Rank: 73
VOTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
VOTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
VOTE Omega Ratio Rank: 74
VOTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
VOTE Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

ACVF vs. VOTE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) and Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (VOTE). 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.

	ACVF	VOTE	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	2.48	-0.54
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	3.37	-0.65
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.45	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.89	3.34	-0.45
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.75	15.35	-3.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACVF vs. VOTE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACVF Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the VOTE Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACVF and VOTE, 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

	ACVF	VOTE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.94	2.48	-0.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.03	0.81	+0.22

Drawdowns

ACVF vs. VOTE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACVF drawdown since its inception was -24.39%, smaller than the maximum VOTE drawdown of -25.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACVF and VOTE.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACVF	VOTE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.39%	-25.71%	+1.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.70%	-9.10%	+1.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.82%	-19.08%	+2.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.75%	-6.15%	+1.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	1.98%	-0.09%

Volatility

ACVF vs. VOTE - Volatility Comparison

American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) has a higher volatility of 3.06% compared to Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) at 2.88%. This indicates that ACVF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOTE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACVF	VOTE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.06%	2.88%	+0.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.00%	9.19%	-0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.39%	12.06%	-0.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.23%	17.15%	-0.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.97%	17.15%	-1.18%

ACVF vs. VOTE - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACVF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than VOTE's 0.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACVF vs. VOTE - Dividend Comparison

ACVF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than VOTE's 0.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ACVF American Conservative Values ETF	0.53%	0.59%	0.59%	0.82%	0.93%	0.61%	0.23%
VOTE Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF	0.89%	1.03%	1.18%	1.33%	1.54%	0.54%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACVF and VOTE in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, ACVF and VOTE move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, ACVF or VOTE?

ACVF has higher volatility (3.06%) compared to VOTE (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACVF dropped -24.39% vs VOTE's -25.71%.

Which ETF is better, ACVF or VOTE?

On 3-year performance, VOTE leads with 23.10% vs 19.83% for ACVF. On fees, VOTE is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, VOTE has been the lower-risk option at 2.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACVF or VOTE?

Over the 3-year period, VOTE has performed better with a 23.10% return vs 19.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACVF or VOTE?

VOTE is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for ACVF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACVF or VOTE?

VOTE has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.53% for ACVF.

What is the main difference between ACVF and VOTE?

They also come from different issuers: Ridgeline Research LLC and Engine No. 1 LLC. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for ACVF and 0.05% for VOTE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VOTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 1.94), 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.