PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BRF vs. FLN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BRF vs. FLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) and First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX Fund (FLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BRF achieves a 5.08% return, which is significantly lower than FLN's 11.67% return. Over the past 10 years, BRF has underperformed FLN with an annualized return of 6.61%, while FLN has yielded a comparatively higher 9.85% annualized return.


BRF

1D
-4.64%
1M
-10.08%
YTD
5.08%
6M
-0.52%
1Y
20.45%
3Y*
5.49%
5Y*
-3.39%
10Y*
6.61%

FLN

1D
-2.00%
1M
-5.45%
YTD
11.67%
6M
11.54%
1Y
36.27%
3Y*
16.20%
5Y*
8.98%
10Y*
9.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BRF vs. FLN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BRF
VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF
5.08%54.17%-35.02%37.21%-14.38%-20.40%-21.07%40.66%-12.07%54.63%
FLN
First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX Fund
11.67%55.05%-23.10%29.68%2.73%-6.94%-12.27%27.22%-8.31%21.54%

Correlation

The correlation between BRF and FLN is 0.84, 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

0.84

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

0.77

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

0.77

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2011

0.73

The correlation between BRF and FLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (all time) to 0.84 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BRF vs. FLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BRF
FLN

Consumer Cyclical

14.2%
5.4%

Real Estate

14.1%
4.7%

Industrials

13.5%
12.4%

Basic Materials

12.9%
12.0%

Consumer Defensive

10.3%
7.2%

Utilities

9.4%
16.9%

Financial Services

8.9%
23.4%

Healthcare

6.0%
0.6%

Energy

5.7%
10.2%

Technology

4.0%
2.1%

Communication Services

-

7.1%

Consumer Cyclical

BRF
14.2%
FLN
5.4%

Real Estate

BRF
14.1%
FLN
4.7%

Industrials

BRF
13.5%
FLN
12.4%

Basic Materials

BRF
12.9%
FLN
12.0%

Consumer Defensive

BRF
10.3%
FLN
7.2%

Utilities

BRF
9.4%
FLN
16.9%

Financial Services

BRF
8.9%
FLN
23.4%

Healthcare

BRF
6.0%
FLN
0.6%

Energy

BRF
5.7%
FLN
10.2%

Technology

BRF
4.0%
FLN
2.1%

Communication Services

BRF

-

FLN
7.1%

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

BRF vs. FLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

BRF
BRF Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
BRF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BRF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
BRF Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
BRF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
BRF Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank

FLN
FLN Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
FLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLN Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
FLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLN Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
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.

BRF vs. FLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) and First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX Fund (FLN). 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.


BRFFLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.30

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.27

3.19

-1.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.58

9.06

-5.47

BRF vs. FLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BRF Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the FLN Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BRF and FLN, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BRFFLNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

1.74

-1.02

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.11

0.40

-0.51

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.36

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.06

0.08

-0.03

Drawdowns

BRF vs. FLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRF drawdown since its inception was -82.26%, which is greater than FLN's maximum drawdown of -57.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRF and FLN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BRFFLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.26%

-57.95%

-24.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.11%

-11.42%

-4.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-37.81%

-25.23%

-12.58%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-50.49%

-25.95%

-24.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.43%

-57.75%

-2.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-48.77%

-9.99%

-38.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-45.74%

-18.90%

-26.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.72%

4.01%

+1.71%

Volatility

BRF vs. FLN - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) has a higher volatility of 10.39% compared to First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX Fund (FLN) at 6.41%. This indicates that BRF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BRFFLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.39%

6.41%

+3.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.39%

18.20%

+6.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.46%

20.96%

+7.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.66%

22.59%

+9.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.94%

27.64%

+6.30%

BRF vs. FLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRF has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than FLN's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

BRF vs. FLN - Dividend Comparison

BRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.28%, more than FLN's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BRF
VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF
5.28%5.54%4.08%5.02%4.13%2.96%1.66%2.54%2.89%4.53%4.25%3.84%
FLN
First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX Fund
3.59%3.40%6.26%4.17%5.57%4.70%1.64%1.91%3.08%10.28%1.06%2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions


BRF and FLN have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BRF has higher volatility (10.39%) compared to FLN (6.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BRF dropped -82.26% vs FLN's -57.95%.

On 10-year performance, FLN leads with 9.85% vs 6.61% for BRF. On fees, BRF is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FLN has been the lower-risk option at 6.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FLN has performed better with a 9.85% return vs 6.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BRF is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FLN.

BRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.28%, compared with 3.59% for FLN.

BRF tracks MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index, while FLN tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Latin America Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BRF and 0.80% for FLN.

FLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 0.72), 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 BRF and FLN

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