DFAT vs. DFLV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

DFAT (Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF) and DFLV (Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFAT is a Small Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional, while DFLV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFAT returned 14.22%/yr vs 17.54%/yr for DFLV. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. DFAT charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for DFLV.

Performance

DFAT vs. DFLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) and Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF (DFLV). 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 DFAT having a 19.60% return and DFLV slightly higher at 19.79%.

DFAT

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 1.65%
• 6M: 12.28%
• YTD: 19.60%
• 1Y: 34.62%
• 3Y*: 14.22%
• 5Y*: 11.52%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.22%

DFLV

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 2.44%
• 6M: 14.18%
• YTD: 19.79%
• 1Y: 33.99%
• 3Y*: 17.54%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DFAT Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF	$27.35M	$25.25M	$22.69M
DFLV Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF	$27.23M	$28.99M	$30.54M

DFAT vs. DFLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFAT Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF	19.60%	8.73%	7.80%	20.86%	-2.31%
DFLV Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF	19.79%	15.90%	12.88%	12.31%	-0.94%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAT and DFLV is 0.86, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2022	0.89

The correlation between DFAT and DFLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFAT vs. DFLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAT	DFLV
Financial Services	29.1%	22.2%
Industrials	15.5%	13.5%
Consumer Cyclical	14.1%	7.4%
Energy	10.0%	14.4%
Technology	7.9%	11.4%
Consumer Defensive	7.3%	4.4%
Healthcare	7.0%	14.5%
Basic Materials	5.5%	6.8%
Communication Services	1.9%	4.7%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.4%
Utilities	0.4%	-

Return for Risk

DFAT vs. DFLV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DFAT

DFAT Risk / Return Rank: 86
DFAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
DFAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
DFAT Omega Ratio Rank: 84
DFAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
DFAT Martin Ratio Rank: 84

DFLV

DFLV Risk / Return Rank: 95
DFLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
DFLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
DFLV Omega Ratio Rank: 94
DFLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
DFLV Martin Ratio Rank: 95

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DFAT vs. DFLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) and Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF (DFLV). 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.

	DFAT	DFLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	2.87	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.99	3.96	-0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.52	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.37	5.88	-2.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.35	21.75	-10.40

DFAT vs. DFLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAT Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is lower than the DFLV Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAT and DFLV, 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

DFAT vs. DFLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAT drawdown since its inception was -26.12%, which is greater than DFLV's maximum drawdown of -16.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAT and DFLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAT	DFLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.12%	-16.80%	-9.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.55%	-5.48%	-4.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.12%	-16.80%	-9.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-0.46%	-0.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.12%	-2.96%	-3.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	1.48%	+1.35%

Volatility

DFAT vs. DFLV - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) has a higher volatility of 3.42% compared to Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF (DFLV) at 2.31%. This indicates that DFAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFAT	DFLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.42%	2.31%	+1.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.32%	8.00%	+2.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.08%	11.28%	+4.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.19%	14.07%	+7.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.26%	14.07%	+7.19%

DFAT vs. DFLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAT has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than DFLV's 0.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFAT vs. DFLV - Dividend Comparison

DFAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, which matches DFLV's 1.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAT Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF	1.36%	1.55%	1.31%	1.34%	1.34%	1.13%
DFLV Dimensional US Large Cap Value ETF	1.36%	1.61%	1.65%	1.72%	0.11%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAT and DFLV in my portfolio?

DFAT and DFLV have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFAT or DFLV?

DFAT has higher volatility (3.42%) compared to DFLV (2.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAT dropped -26.12% vs DFLV's -16.80%.

Which ETF is better, DFAT or DFLV?

On 3-year performance, DFLV leads with 17.54% vs 14.22% for DFAT. On fees, DFLV is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, DFLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFAT or DFLV?

Over the 3-year period, DFLV has performed better with a 17.54% return vs 14.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAT or DFLV?

DFLV is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for DFAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFAT or DFLV?

DFAT and DFLV have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.36%.

What is the main difference between DFAT and DFLV?

DFAT is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while DFLV is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for DFAT and 0.22% for DFLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.01), 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.