DFRA vs. LVDS

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

DFRA (Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF) and LVDS (JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. DFRA is passively managed, while LVDS is actively managed. Over the past year, DFRA returned 12.72% vs 32.37% for LVDS. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. DFRA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for LVDS.

Performance

DFRA vs. LVDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF (DFRA) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFRA achieves a 8.56% return, which is significantly lower than LVDS's 21.33% return.

DFRA

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 3.14%
• 6M: 1.06%
• YTD: 8.56%
• 1Y: 12.72%
• 3Y*: 9.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.34%

LVDS

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 3.07%
• 6M: 15.80%
• YTD: 21.33%
• 1Y: 32.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 28.81%

*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)
DFRA Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF	$255.09K	$266.40K	$366.51K
LVDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF	$280.78K	$226.17K	$161.39K

DFRA vs. LVDS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DFRA Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF	8.56%	1.85%
LVDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF	21.33%	7.40%

Correlation

The correlation between DFRA and LVDS is 0.72, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025	0.73

The correlation between DFRA and LVDS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFRA vs. LVDS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFRA	LVDS
Industrials	35.7%	11.7%
Energy	26.3%	5.8%
Basic Materials	18.5%	2.7%
Real Estate	12.1%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	6.2%
Utilities	2.8%	4.6%
Technology	1.5%	19.0%
Communication Services	-	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.2%
Financial Services	-	18.5%
Healthcare	-	11.8%

Return for Risk

DFRA vs. LVDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFRA

DFRA Risk / Return Rank: 31
DFRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
DFRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
DFRA Omega Ratio Rank: 32
DFRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
DFRA Martin Ratio Rank: 28

LVDS

LVDS Risk / Return Rank: 95
LVDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
LVDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
LVDS Omega Ratio Rank: 94
LVDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
LVDS Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

DFRA vs. LVDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF (DFRA) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). 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.

	DFRA	LVDS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.81	2.92	-2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.18	4.09	-2.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.52	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	4.65	-3.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.42	19.27	-16.84

DFRA vs. LVDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFRA Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the LVDS Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFRA and LVDS, 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

DFRA vs. LVDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFRA drawdown since its inception was -19.35%, which is greater than LVDS's maximum drawdown of -6.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFRA and LVDS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFRA	LVDS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.35%	-6.64%	-12.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.64%	-6.64%	-5.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.35%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.34%	0.00%	-7.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.14%	-0.89%	-3.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.99%	1.60%	+3.39%

Volatility

DFRA vs. LVDS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF (DFRA) is 2.62%, while JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS) has a volatility of 2.79%. This indicates that DFRA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LVDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFRA	LVDS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.62%	2.79%	-0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.91%	8.12%	+4.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.94%	10.62%	+4.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.36%	10.53%	+6.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.36%	10.53%	+6.83%

DFRA vs. LVDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFRA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than LVDS's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFRA vs. LVDS - Dividend Comparison

DFRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.54%, less than LVDS's 7.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFRA Donoghue Forlines Yield Enhanced Real Asset ETF	3.54%	2.86%	10.13%	4.70%	8.40%	0.08%
LVDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF	7.42%	8.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFRA and LVDS in my portfolio?

DFRA and LVDS have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFRA or LVDS?

LVDS has higher volatility (2.79%) compared to DFRA (2.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFRA dropped -19.35% vs LVDS's -6.64%.

Which ETF is better, DFRA or LVDS?

On 1-year performance, LVDS leads with 32.37% vs 12.72% for DFRA. On fees, LVDS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, DFRA has been the lower-risk option at 2.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFRA or LVDS?

Over the 1-year period, LVDS has performed better with a 32.37% return vs 12.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFRA or LVDS?

LVDS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for DFRA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFRA or LVDS?

LVDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.42%, compared with 3.54% for DFRA.

What is the main difference between DFRA and LVDS?

They also come from different issuers: Donoghue Forlines and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for DFRA and 0.30% for LVDS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LVDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 0.81), 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.