BFOR vs. RFDA
BFOR (ALPS Barron's 400 ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BFOR is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Barron's 400 Index, while RFDA is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by SS&C. BFOR is passively managed, while RFDA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BFOR returned 9.98%/yr vs 13.17%/yr for RFDA. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BFOR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.
Performance
BFOR vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFOR achieves a 9.89% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 11.40% return.
BFOR
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 2.26%
- YTD
- 9.89%
- 6M
- 10.61%
- 1Y
- 22.04%
- 3Y*
- 19.35%
- 5Y*
- 9.98%
- 10Y*
- 12.37%
RFDA
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- 4.27%
- YTD
- 11.40%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- 1Y
- 29.49%
- 3Y*
- 19.19%
- 5Y*
- 13.17%
- 10Y*
- —
BFOR vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF | 9.89% | 13.85% | 17.81% | 18.19% | -15.92% | 30.71% | 17.60% | 21.30% | -13.86% | 19.37% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 11.40% | 16.42% | 20.12% | 16.98% | -8.58% | 25.94% | 11.26% | 27.15% | -9.27% | 19.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFOR and RFDA is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2016 | 0.85 |
The correlation between BFOR and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
BFOR vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BFOR
RFDA
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
BFOR
RFDA
Technology
BFOR
RFDA
Industrials
BFOR
RFDA
Healthcare
BFOR
RFDA
Consumer Cyclical
BFOR
RFDA
Energy
BFOR
RFDA
Consumer Defensive
BFOR
RFDA
Communication Services
BFOR
RFDA
Basic Materials
BFOR
RFDA
Utilities
BFOR
RFDA
Real Estate
BFOR
-
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
BFOR vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank
BFOR
RFDA
BFOR vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) 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.
| BFOR | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.47 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.46 | 5.44 | -2.97 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.02 | 19.87 | -10.85 |
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
| BFOR | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.50 | 2.55 | -1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.84 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 0.79 | -0.20 |
Drawdowns
BFOR vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFOR drawdown since its inception was -41.27%, which is greater than RFDA's maximum drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFOR and RFDA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFOR | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.27% | -34.60% | -6.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.98% | -5.45% | -3.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.91% | -19.35% | -2.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.93% | -19.35% | -6.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.27% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.49% | -0.92% | +0.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.43% | -3.74% | -2.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.45% | 1.49% | +0.96% |
Volatility
BFOR vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison
ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) has a higher volatility of 3.52% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.66%. This indicates that BFOR'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
| BFOR | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.52% | 2.66% | +0.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.64% | 8.47% | +2.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.80% | 11.64% | +3.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.41% | 15.73% | +3.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.41% | 16.85% | +3.56% |
BFOR vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFOR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFOR vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison
BFOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, less than RFDA's 1.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF | 0.54% | 0.60% | 0.69% | 1.26% | 1.68% | 0.92% | 0.98% | 0.69% | 0.94% | 0.60% | 0.78% | 0.86% |
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% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BFOR and RFDA have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BFOR has higher volatility (3.52%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs RFDA's -34.60%.
On 5-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.17% vs 9.98% for BFOR. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% 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.
Over the 5-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 13.17% return vs 9.98%. 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 0.65% for BFOR.
RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.54% for BFOR.
BFOR is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while RFDA is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BFOR and 0.52% for RFDA.
RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.50), 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 BFOR 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