DFAC vs. DFIV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DFAC (Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF) and DFIV (Dimensional International Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFAC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional, while DFIV is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFAC returned 19.52%/yr vs 22.72%/yr for DFIV. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFAC charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for DFIV.

Performance

DFAC vs. DFIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFAC achieves a 10.46% return, which is significantly higher than DFIV's 8.43% return.

DFAC

• 1D: -1.29%
• 1M: 0.07%
• YTD: 10.46%
• 6M: 9.33%
• 1Y: 25.95%
• 3Y*: 19.52%
• 5Y*: 11.69%
• 10Y*: —

DFIV

• 1D: -2.74%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: 8.43%
• 6M: 8.10%
• 1Y: 30.90%
• 3Y*: 22.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFAC vs. DFIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	10.46%	15.66%	19.61%	21.96%	-14.93%	6.93%
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	8.43%	45.36%	7.26%	17.75%	-3.70%	0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAC and DFIV is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021	0.73

The correlation between DFAC and DFIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFAC vs. DFIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAC	DFIV
Technology	31.2%	3.2%
Financial Services	13.8%	32.4%
Industrials	12.4%	9.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	10.0%
Healthcare	9.1%	4.9%
Communication Services	7.8%	4.3%
Energy	5.3%	15.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	4.9%
Basic Materials	3.2%	11.4%
Utilities	1.8%	2.2%
Real Estate	0.2%	1.7%

Return for Risk

DFAC vs. DFIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFAC

DFAC Risk / Return Rank: 66
DFAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
DFAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
DFAC Omega Ratio Rank: 63
DFAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
DFAC Martin Ratio Rank: 74

DFIV

DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 68
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 68
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

DFAC vs. DFIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). 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.

	DFAC	DFIV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.07	2.17	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.84	2.95	-0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.39	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.07	3.21	-0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.40	12.28	+1.12

DFAC vs. DFIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAC Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is comparable to the DFIV Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAC and DFIV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DFAC vs. DFIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAC drawdown since its inception was -23.12%, smaller than the maximum DFIV drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAC and DFIV.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAC	DFIV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.12%	-25.42%	+2.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.49%	-9.66%	+1.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.02%	-14.72%	-5.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	-3.78%	+1.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.40%	-4.45%	-0.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.94%	2.52%	-0.58%

Volatility

DFAC vs. DFIV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) is 4.56%, while Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) has a volatility of 4.96%. This indicates that DFAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DFIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFAC	DFIV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.56%	4.96%	-0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.73%	11.79%	-2.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.64%	14.32%	-1.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	16.67%	+0.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.14%	16.67%	+0.47%

DFAC vs. DFIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAC has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than DFIV's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

DFAC vs. DFIV - Dividend Comparison

DFAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, less than DFIV's 2.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	0.92%	0.97%	1.03%	1.20%	1.50%	0.88%
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	2.63%	2.92%	3.88%	3.93%	3.84%	2.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAC and DFIV in my portfolio?

DFAC and DFIV have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFAC or DFIV?

DFIV has higher volatility (4.96%) compared to DFAC (4.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAC dropped -23.12% vs DFIV's -25.42%.

Which ETF is better, DFAC or DFIV?

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 22.72% vs 19.52% for DFAC. On fees, DFAC is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, DFAC has been the lower-risk option at 4.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFAC or DFIV?

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 22.72% return vs 19.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAC or DFIV?

DFAC is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for DFIV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFAC or DFIV?

DFIV has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 0.92% for DFAC.

What is the main difference between DFAC and DFIV?

DFAC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while DFIV is Foreign Large Cap Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for DFAC and 0.27% for DFIV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 2.07), 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.