PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
DFAT vs. RZV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

DFAT vs. RZV

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

DFAT (Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF) and RZV (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. DFAT is actively managed, while RZV is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFAT returned 17.55%/yr vs 19.15%/yr for RZV. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFAT charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RZV.

Performance

DFAT vs. RZV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFAT achieves a 14.41% return, which is significantly lower than RZV's 19.32% return.

DFAT

1D
1.01%
1M
1.12%
YTD
14.41%
6M
14.52%
1Y
32.14%
3Y*
17.55%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

RZV

1D
1.31%
1M
3.43%
YTD
19.32%
6M
17.69%
1Y
45.33%
3Y*
19.15%
5Y*
9.13%
10Y*
10.50%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DFAT vs. RZV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
DFAT
Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF		14.41%8.73%7.80%20.86%-6.23%5.08%
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF		19.32%8.65%5.06%22.97%-6.80%-0.56%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAT and RZV is 0.91, 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

0.91

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

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2021

0.94

The correlation between DFAT and RZV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFAT vs. RZV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
DFAT
RZV

Financial Services

28.0%
7.3%

Industrials

15.9%
15.7%

Consumer Cyclical

14.4%
26.1%

Energy

11.5%
9.7%

Technology

9.2%
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%
7.7%

Healthcare

6.2%
8.8%

Basic Materials

5.1%
6.4%

Communication Services

1.8%
4.2%

Real Estate

0.9%
5.0%

Utilities

0.4%
0.4%

Financial Services

DFAT
28.0%
RZV
7.3%

Industrials

DFAT
15.9%
RZV
15.7%

Consumer Cyclical

DFAT
14.4%
RZV
26.1%

Energy

DFAT
11.5%
RZV
9.7%

Technology

DFAT
9.2%
RZV
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

DFAT
6.7%
RZV
7.7%

Healthcare

DFAT
6.2%
RZV
8.8%

Basic Materials

DFAT
5.1%
RZV
6.4%

Communication Services

DFAT
1.8%
RZV
4.2%

Real Estate

DFAT
0.9%
RZV
5.0%

Utilities

DFAT
0.4%
RZV
0.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF

Often compared with DFAT:
DFAT vs. AVUVDFAT vs. DFUVXDFAT vs. VBRDFAT vs. DFUSDFAT vs. DFACDFAT vs. DFLVDFAT vs. DVY
Often compared with RZV:
RZV vs. AVUVRZV vs. RWJRZV vs. RPVRZV vs. VBRRZV vs. IJRRZV vs. PSCCRZV vs. SPY

Return for Risk

DFAT vs. RZV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
DFAT
DFAT Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
DFAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFAT Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
DFAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFAT Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank
RZV
RZV Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
RZV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZV Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
RZV Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZV Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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.

DFAT vs. RZV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV). 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.

DFATRZVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.93
2.21

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.84
3.10

-0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.37

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.38

3.63

-0.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.84

11.80

-0.96

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFAT vs. RZV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is comparable to the RZV Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAT and RZV, 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

DFATRZVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.93

2.21

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

—

0.38

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.39

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.27

+0.19

Drawdowns

DFAT vs. RZV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAT drawdown since its inception was -26.12%, smaller than the maximum RZV drawdown of -77.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAT and RZV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

DFATRZVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.12%

-77.11%

+50.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.55%

-12.56%

+3.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.12%

-29.81%

+3.69%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-29.81%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-60.42%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.24%

-13.60%

+7.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.97%

3.85%

-0.88%

Volatility

DFAT vs. RZV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) is 3.96%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) has a volatility of 5.27%. This indicates that DFAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RZV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

DFATRZVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.96%

5.27%

-1.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.91%

13.71%

-2.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.70%

20.67%

-3.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.48%

24.37%

-2.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.48%

27.03%

-5.55%

DFAT vs. RZV - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAT has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than RZV's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFAT vs. RZV - Dividend Comparison

DFAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, more than RZV's 1.33% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DFAT
Dimensional U.S. Targeted Value ETF		1.43%1.55%1.31%1.34%1.34%1.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF		1.33%1.59%1.14%1.13%1.43%0.86%0.63%1.03%2.03%1.02%0.46%1.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.91, DFAT and RZV move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

RZV has higher volatility (5.27%) compared to DFAT (3.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAT dropped -26.12% vs RZV's -77.11%.

On 3-year performance, RZV leads with 19.15% vs 17.55% for DFAT. On fees, DFAT is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, DFAT has been the lower-risk option at 3.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, RZV has performed better with a 19.15% return vs 17.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DFAT is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RZV.

DFAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 1.33% for RZV.

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for DFAT and 0.35% for RZV.

RZV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.93), 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 DFAT and RZV

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