PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DFAR vs. BLDG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DFAR vs. BLDG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional US Real Estate ETF (DFAR) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFAR achieves a 15.09% return, which is significantly higher than BLDG's 9.76% return.


DFAR

1D
0.73%
1M
0.69%
YTD
15.09%
6M
15.60%
1Y
13.30%
3Y*
11.71%
5Y*
10Y*

BLDG

1D
0.65%
1M
1.97%
YTD
9.76%
6M
10.36%
1Y
11.23%
3Y*
11.02%
5Y*
2.99%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DFAR vs. BLDG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
DFAR
Dimensional US Real Estate ETF
15.09%1.31%5.25%11.04%-12.16%
BLDG
Cambria Global Real Estate ETF
9.76%4.26%8.18%1.76%-10.05%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAR and BLDG is 0.75, 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

0.75

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

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022

0.83

The correlation between DFAR and BLDG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

DFAR vs. BLDG — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFAR
DFAR Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
DFAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFAR Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
DFAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFAR Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

BLDG
BLDG Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
BLDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLDG Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
BLDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLDG Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

DFAR vs. BLDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional US Real Estate ETF (DFAR) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). 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.


DFARBLDGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

0.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.17

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.58

1.12

+0.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.95

3.92

+1.02

DFAR vs. BLDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAR Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is comparable to the BLDG Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAR and BLDG, 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

DFAR vs. BLDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAR drawdown since its inception was -32.27%, which is greater than BLDG's maximum drawdown of -27.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAR and BLDG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DFARBLDGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.27%

-27.25%

-5.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.43%

-10.08%

+1.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.64%

-18.57%

+0.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.31%

-1.83%

+0.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.05%

-9.15%

-4.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.69%

2.87%

-0.18%

Volatility

DFAR vs. BLDG - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional US Real Estate ETF (DFAR) has a higher volatility of 5.04% compared to Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) at 4.60%. This indicates that DFAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLDG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DFARBLDGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.04%

4.60%

+0.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.22%

9.05%

+1.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.74%

11.61%

+2.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.16%

15.28%

+3.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.16%

15.56%

+3.60%

DFAR vs. BLDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than BLDG's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

DFAR vs. BLDG - Dividend Comparison

DFAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, less than BLDG's 5.35% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
BLDG
Cambria Global Real Estate ETF
5.35%7.46%7.97%4.99%3.99%10.40%0.59%
DFAR
Dimensional US Real Estate ETF
2.68%2.97%2.89%3.06%1.69%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


DFAR and BLDG have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DFAR has higher volatility (5.04%) compared to BLDG (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAR dropped -32.27% vs BLDG's -27.25%.

On 3-year performance, DFAR leads with 11.71% vs 11.02% for BLDG. On fees, DFAR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, BLDG has been the lower-risk option at 4.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, DFAR has performed better with a 11.71% return vs 11.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DFAR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BLDG.

BLDG has the higher dividend yield at 5.35%, compared with 2.68% for DFAR.

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for DFAR and 0.59% for BLDG.

DFAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.98 vs 0.97), 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 DFAR and BLDG

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