DFUV vs. DFAS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DFUV (Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF) and DFAS (Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFUV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional, while DFAS is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFUV returned 19.49%/yr vs 15.91%/yr for DFAS. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFUV charges 0.21%/yr vs 0.26%/yr for DFAS.

Performance

DFUV vs. DFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF (DFUV) and Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF (DFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFUV achieves a 17.25% return, which is significantly higher than DFAS's 14.69% return.

DFUV

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: 2.47%
• YTD: 17.25%
• 6M: 16.43%
• 1Y: 32.73%
• 3Y*: 19.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DFAS

• 1D: -0.91%
• 1M: 2.82%
• YTD: 14.69%
• 6M: 12.40%
• 1Y: 28.52%
• 3Y*: 15.91%
• 5Y*: 7.86%
• 10Y*: —

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

DFUV vs. DFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFUV Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF	17.25%	15.77%	11.79%	13.25%	-0.71%
DFAS Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF	14.69%	8.17%	10.21%	17.83%	-0.35%

Correlation

The correlation between DFUV and DFAS is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022	0.92

The correlation between DFUV and DFAS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFUV vs. DFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFUV	DFAS
Financial Services	21.6%	19.2%
Technology	16.5%	15.1%
Healthcare	14.0%	12.0%
Industrials	13.5%	18.9%
Energy	11.4%	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	7.3%	13.0%
Basic Materials	5.9%	5.2%
Communication Services	5.1%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	4.2%
Real Estate	0.3%	0.7%
Utilities	0.1%	2.8%

Return for Risk

DFUV vs. DFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFUV

DFUV Risk / Return Rank: 88
DFUV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
DFUV Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
DFUV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
DFUV Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
DFUV Martin Ratio Rank: 90

DFAS

DFAS Risk / Return Rank: 56
DFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
DFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
DFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 47
DFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
DFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

DFUV vs. DFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF (DFUV) and Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF (DFAS). 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.

	DFUV	DFAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	1.69	+1.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	2.49	+1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.29	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.48	3.06	+2.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.67	10.51	+9.15

DFUV vs. DFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFUV Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is higher than the DFAS Sharpe Ratio of 1.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFUV and DFAS, 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

DFUV vs. DFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFUV drawdown since its inception was -17.60%, smaller than the maximum DFAS drawdown of -26.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFUV and DFAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFUV	DFAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.60%	-26.13%	+8.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.01%	-9.36%	+3.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.60%	-26.13%	+8.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.29%	-1.03%	-0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.61%	-8.23%	+4.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.67%	2.72%	-1.05%

Volatility

DFUV vs. DFAS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF (DFUV) is 4.21%, while Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF (DFAS) has a volatility of 4.84%. This indicates that DFUV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DFAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFUV	DFAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.21%	4.84%	-0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.92%	11.96%	-3.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.18%	17.00%	-4.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.27%	20.81%	-4.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.27%	20.82%	-4.55%

DFUV vs. DFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFUV has a 0.21% expense ratio, which is lower than DFAS's 0.26% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

DFUV vs. DFAS - Dividend Comparison

DFUV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than DFAS's 0.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAS Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF	0.91%	0.99%	0.93%	1.00%	1.03%	2.87%
DFUV Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF	1.35%	1.55%	1.64%	1.72%	1.34%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFUV and DFAS in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, DFUV and DFAS 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.

Which is riskier, DFUV or DFAS?

DFAS has higher volatility (4.84%) compared to DFUV (4.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFUV dropped -17.60% vs DFAS's -26.13%.

Which ETF is better, DFUV or DFAS?

On 3-year performance, DFUV leads with 19.49% vs 15.91% for DFAS. On fees, DFUV is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, DFUV has been the lower-risk option at 4.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFUV or DFAS?

Over the 3-year period, DFUV has performed better with a 19.49% return vs 15.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFUV or DFAS?

DFUV is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.26% for DFAS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFUV or DFAS?

DFUV has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.91% for DFAS.

What is the main difference between DFUV and DFAS?

DFUV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while DFAS is Small Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.21% for DFUV and 0.26% for DFAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFUV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 1.69), 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.