PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AFIF vs. AAA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AFIF vs. AAA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF (AFIF) and AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF (AAA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFIF achieves a 1.55% return, which is significantly lower than AAA's 2.06% return.


AFIF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.44%
YTD
1.55%
6M
1.69%
1Y
5.31%
3Y*
7.41%
5Y*
3.70%
10Y*

AAA

1D
0.07%
1M
0.62%
YTD
2.06%
6M
2.76%
1Y
5.10%
3Y*
6.36%
5Y*
4.67%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AFIF vs. AAA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
AFIF
Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF
1.55%6.56%7.06%9.73%-5.38%-0.50%0.02%
AAA
AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF
2.06%4.92%6.85%8.94%0.15%0.86%0.20%

Correlation

The correlation between AFIF and AAA is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.10

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.07

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 9, 2020

0.06

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

AFIF vs. AAA — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFIF
AFIF Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
AFIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AFIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
AFIF Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
AFIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
AFIF Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

AAA
AAA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
AAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
AAA Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
AAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
AAA Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AFIF vs. AAA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF (AFIF) and AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF (AAA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


AFIFAAADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.44

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.27

8.50

-5.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.44

25.11

-10.67

AFIF vs. AAA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AFIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the AAA Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AFIF and AAA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

AFIF vs. AAA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFIF drawdown since its inception was -10.29%, which is greater than AAA's maximum drawdown of -2.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFIF and AAA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AFIFAAADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.29%

-2.63%

-7.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.63%

-0.60%

-1.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.79%

-2.40%

+0.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-8.85%

-2.63%

-6.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.10%

-0.03%

-0.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.21%

-0.31%

-1.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.37%

0.20%

+0.17%

Volatility

AFIF vs. AAA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF (AFIF) is 0.37%, while AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF (AAA) has a volatility of 0.77%. This indicates that AFIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AFIFAAADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.37%

0.77%

-0.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.99%

1.79%

+0.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74%

2.32%

+0.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.40%

2.29%

+2.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.25%

2.15%

+4.10%

AFIF vs. AAA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFIF has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than AAA's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

AFIF vs. AAA - Dividend Comparison

AFIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.73%, less than AAA's 4.89% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
AAA
AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF
4.89%5.11%6.17%6.11%2.78%1.06%0.32%0.00%0.00%
AFIF
Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF
3.73%3.52%5.61%5.91%3.49%1.73%1.25%2.54%0.69%

Frequently Asked Questions


AFIF and AAA have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AAA has higher volatility (0.77%) compared to AFIF (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFIF dropped -10.29% vs AAA's -2.63%.

On 5-year performance, AAA leads with 4.67% vs 3.70% for AFIF. On fees, AAA is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AFIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, AAA has performed better with a 4.67% return vs 3.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AAA is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.08% for AFIF.

AAA has the higher dividend yield at 4.89%, compared with 3.73% for AFIF.

AFIF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while AAA is CLO. They also come from different issuers: Regents Park Funds and Alternative Access Funds LLC. Their fees differ too: 1.08% for AFIF and 0.25% for AAA.

AAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AFIF and AAA

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