DFAR vs. DFAC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DFAR (Dimensional US Real Estate ETF) and DFAC (Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFAR is a REIT fund actively managed by Dimensional, while DFAC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFAR returned 9.64%/yr vs 20.56%/yr for DFAC. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFAR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for DFAC.

Performance

DFAR vs. DFAC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with DFAR having a 11.46% return and DFAC slightly higher at 11.90%.

DFAR

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: -0.51%
• YTD: 11.46%
• 6M: 10.41%
• 1Y: 11.45%
• 3Y*: 9.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DFAC

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 4.57%
• YTD: 11.90%
• 6M: 12.19%
• 1Y: 28.89%
• 3Y*: 20.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFAR vs. DFAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFAR Dimensional US Real Estate ETF	11.46%	1.31%	5.25%	11.04%	-14.30%
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	11.90%	15.66%	19.61%	21.96%	-6.89%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAR and DFAC is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2022	0.62

Over the past year, the correlation between DFAR and DFAC has dropped to 0.40 - well below their long-term average of 0.62, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

DFAR vs. DFAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAR	DFAC
Real Estate	99.8%	0.2%
Financial Services	0.0%	14.4%
Basic Materials	-	3.2%
Communication Services	-	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.7%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.9%
Energy	-	5.9%
Healthcare	-	9.0%
Industrials	-	12.8%
Technology	-	28.4%
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

DFAR vs. DFAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFAR

DFAR Risk / Return Rank: 25
DFAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
DFAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
DFAR Omega Ratio Rank: 23
DFAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
DFAR Martin Ratio Rank: 29

DFAC

DFAC Risk / Return Rank: 71
DFAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
DFAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
DFAC Omega Ratio Rank: 70
DFAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
DFAC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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. DFAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional US Real Estate ETF (DFAR) and Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC). 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.

	DFAR	DFAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	2.39	-1.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.25	3.31	-2.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.43	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.36	3.42	-2.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.29	15.17	-10.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFAR vs. DFAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAR Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the DFAC Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAR and DFAC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DFAR	DFAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88	2.39	-1.51
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.15	0.71	-0.55

Drawdowns

DFAR vs. DFAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAR drawdown since its inception was -32.27%, which is greater than DFAC's maximum drawdown of -23.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAR and DFAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAR	DFAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.27%	-23.12%	-9.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.43%	-8.49%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.64%	-20.02%	+2.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.01%	-0.67%	-2.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.22%	-5.45%	-8.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.67%	1.91%	+0.76%

Volatility

DFAR vs. DFAC - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional US Real Estate ETF (DFAR) has a higher volatility of 3.71% compared to Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) at 3.01%. This indicates that DFAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFAR	DFAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.71%	3.01%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.40%	8.96%	+0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.10%	12.15%	+0.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.13%	17.13%	+2.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.13%	17.13%	+2.00%

DFAR vs. DFAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than DFAC's 0.17% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

DFAR vs. DFAC - Dividend Comparison

DFAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.77%, more than DFAC's 0.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	0.91%	0.97%	1.03%	1.20%	1.50%	0.88%
DFAR Dimensional US Real Estate ETF	2.77%	2.97%	2.89%	3.06%	1.69%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAR and DFAC in my portfolio?

DFAR and DFAC have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFAR or DFAC?

DFAR has higher volatility (3.71%) compared to DFAC (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAR dropped -32.27% vs DFAC's -23.12%.

Which ETF is better, DFAR or DFAC?

On 3-year performance, DFAC leads with 20.56% vs 9.64% for DFAR. On fees, DFAC is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, DFAC has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFAR or DFAC?

Over the 3-year period, DFAC has performed better with a 20.56% return vs 9.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAR or DFAC?

DFAC is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for DFAR.

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

DFAR has the higher dividend yield at 2.77%, compared with 0.91% for DFAC.

What is the main difference between DFAR and DFAC?

DFAR is categorized as REIT, while DFAC is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for DFAR and 0.17% for DFAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.88), 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.