PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AFSC vs. RB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AFSC vs. RB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFSC achieves a 16.58% return, which is significantly higher than RB's 6.76% return.


AFSC

1D
-0.69%
1M
1.96%
YTD
16.58%
6M
13.48%
1Y
27.01%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

RB

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.63%
YTD
6.76%
6M
8.48%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AFSC vs. RB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between AFSC and RB is 0.73, 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 Jun 27, 2025

0.73

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

AFSC vs. RB — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFSC
AFSC Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
AFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
AFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
AFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
AFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

RB
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.

AFSC vs. RB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). 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.


AFSCRBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.96

AFSC vs. RB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AFSCRBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

3.15

-2.48

Drawdowns

AFSC vs. RB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFSC drawdown since its inception was -21.68%, which is greater than RB's maximum drawdown of -1.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFSC and RB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AFSCRBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.68%

-1.70%

-19.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.29%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.79%

-0.47%

-1.32%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.15%

-0.41%

-3.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.72%

Volatility

AFSC vs. RB - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AFSCRBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.59%

6.21%

+12.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.57%

6.21%

+16.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.57%

6.21%

+16.36%

AFSC vs. RB - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFSC has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than RB's 0.58% expense ratio.


Dividends

AFSC vs. RB - Dividend Comparison

AFSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than RB's 2.00% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


AFSC and RB have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, RB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AFSC.

RB has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 0.07% for AFSC.

AFSC is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RB is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for AFSC and 0.58% for RB.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AFSC and RB

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