DFIS vs. DFAC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

DFIS (Dimensional International Small Cap ETF) and DFAC (Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFIS is a Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities 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, DFIS returned 19.89%/yr vs 21.06%/yr for DFAC. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFIS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for DFAC.

Performance

DFIS vs. DFAC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFIS achieves a 11.25% return, which is significantly lower than DFAC's 12.69% return.

DFIS

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 2.95%
• YTD: 11.25%
• 6M: 14.62%
• 1Y: 28.32%
• 3Y*: 19.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DFAC

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 4.24%
• YTD: 12.69%
• 6M: 12.80%
• 1Y: 29.91%
• 3Y*: 21.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFIS vs. DFAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFIS Dimensional International Small Cap ETF	11.25%	37.49%	3.80%	15.19%	-12.94%
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	12.69%	15.66%	19.61%	21.96%	-11.10%

Correlation

The correlation between DFIS and DFAC is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2022	0.75

The correlation between DFIS and DFAC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFIS vs. DFAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFIS	DFAC
Industrials	23.9%	12.8%
Basic Materials	14.2%	3.2%
Consumer Cyclical	13.5%	10.7%
Financial Services	12.0%	14.4%
Technology	9.6%	28.4%
Energy	6.0%	5.9%
Healthcare	5.2%	9.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	4.9%
Real Estate	3.7%	0.2%
Communication Services	3.6%	8.4%
Utilities	3.3%	1.9%

Return for Risk

DFIS vs. DFAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFIS

DFIS Risk / Return Rank: 55
DFIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
DFIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
DFIS Omega Ratio Rank: 58
DFIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
DFIS Martin Ratio Rank: 53

DFAC

DFAC Risk / Return Rank: 76
DFAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
DFAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
DFAC Omega Ratio Rank: 75
DFAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
DFAC Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

DFIS vs. DFAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional International Small Cap ETF (DFIS) 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.

	DFIS	DFAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	2.47	-0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	3.41	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.44	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.29	3.54	-1.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.82	15.71	-6.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFIS vs. DFAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFIS Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is comparable to the DFAC Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFIS 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

	DFIS	DFAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.96	2.47	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	0.71	-0.03

Drawdowns

DFIS vs. DFAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFIS drawdown since its inception was -27.23%, which is greater than DFAC's maximum drawdown of -23.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFIS and DFAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFIS	DFAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.23%	-23.12%	-4.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.44%	-8.49%	-3.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.55%	-20.02%	+6.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.04%	0.00%	-1.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.17%	-5.45%	-0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	1.91%	+1.31%

Volatility

DFIS vs. DFAC - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional International Small Cap ETF (DFIS) has a higher volatility of 4.72% compared to Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) at 2.93%. This indicates that DFIS'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

	DFIS	DFAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.72%	2.93%	+1.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.06%	8.98%	+3.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.53%	12.15%	+2.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.32%	17.12%	+0.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.32%	17.12%	+0.20%

DFIS vs. DFAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFIS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than DFAC's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFIS vs. DFAC - Dividend Comparison

DFIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, more than DFAC's 0.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	0.90%	0.97%	1.03%	1.20%	1.50%	0.88%
DFIS Dimensional International Small Cap ETF	2.00%	2.23%	2.19%	2.36%	1.13%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFIS and DFAC in my portfolio?

DFIS and DFAC have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFIS or DFAC?

DFIS has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to DFAC (2.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFIS dropped -27.23% vs DFAC's -23.12%.

Which ETF is better, DFIS or DFAC?

On 3-year performance, DFAC leads with 21.06% vs 19.89% for DFIS. On fees, DFAC is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, DFAC has been the lower-risk option at 2.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFIS or DFAC?

Over the 3-year period, DFAC has performed better with a 21.06% return vs 19.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFIS or DFAC?

DFAC is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for DFIS.

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

DFIS has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 0.90% for DFAC.

What is the main difference between DFIS and DFAC?

DFIS is categorized as Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities, while DFAC is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for DFIS and 0.17% for DFAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.96), 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.