PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DWAW vs. RFDA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DWAW vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF (DWAW) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DWAW achieves a 16.16% return, which is significantly higher than RFDA's 11.40% return.


DWAW

1D
-0.51%
1M
8.96%
YTD
16.16%
6M
17.44%
1Y
27.21%
3Y*
19.57%
5Y*
7.23%
10Y*

RFDA

1D
-0.92%
1M
4.27%
YTD
11.40%
6M
12.25%
1Y
29.49%
3Y*
19.19%
5Y*
13.17%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DWAW vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
DWAW
AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF
16.16%10.85%18.48%11.18%-17.80%3.49%48.87%-0.38%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
11.40%16.42%20.12%16.98%-8.58%25.94%11.26%0.00%

Correlation

The correlation between DWAW and RFDA is 0.72, 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

0.72

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

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 30, 2019

0.81

The correlation between DWAW and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

DWAW vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
DWAW
RFDA

Technology

29.1%
19.9%

Financial Services

20.0%
14.7%

Industrials

12.8%
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.8%
7.0%

Healthcare

7.1%
8.8%

Communication Services

6.5%
8.8%

Basic Materials

4.6%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
7.6%

Energy

3.7%
12.5%

Utilities

2.9%
5.0%

Real Estate

1.4%
5.0%

Technology

DWAW
29.1%
RFDA
19.9%

Financial Services

DWAW
20.0%
RFDA
14.7%

Industrials

DWAW
12.8%
RFDA
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

DWAW
7.8%
RFDA
7.0%

Healthcare

DWAW
7.1%
RFDA
8.8%

Communication Services

DWAW
6.5%
RFDA
8.8%

Basic Materials

DWAW
4.6%
RFDA
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

DWAW
4.0%
RFDA
7.6%

Energy

DWAW
3.7%
RFDA
12.5%

Utilities

DWAW
2.9%
RFDA
5.0%

Real Estate

DWAW
1.4%
RFDA
5.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

DWAW vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

DWAW
DWAW Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
DWAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DWAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
DWAW Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
DWAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
DWAW Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

RFDA
RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

DWAW vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF (DWAW) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). 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.


DWAWRFDADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.79

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.47

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.36

5.44

-3.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.57

19.87

-10.30

DWAW vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DWAW Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is lower than the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DWAW and RFDA, 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


DWAWRFDADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.76

2.55

-0.79

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

0.84

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.79

-0.23

Drawdowns

DWAW vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DWAW drawdown since its inception was -31.55%, smaller than the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DWAW and RFDA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DWAWRFDADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.55%

-34.60%

+3.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.58%

-5.45%

-6.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.91%

-19.35%

-3.56%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.43%

-19.35%

-9.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.51%

-0.92%

+0.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.98%

-3.74%

-7.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.85%

1.49%

+1.36%

Volatility

DWAW vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF (DWAW) has a higher volatility of 5.42% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.66%. This indicates that DWAW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RFDA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DWAWRFDADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.42%

2.66%

+2.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.97%

8.47%

+4.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.57%

11.64%

+3.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.13%

15.73%

+3.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.41%

16.85%

+5.56%

DWAW vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

DWAW has a 1.24% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

DWAW vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

DWAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, less than RFDA's 1.77% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
DWAW
AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF
0.66%0.76%0.00%1.70%0.53%1.45%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
1.77%1.89%2.23%2.68%3.57%1.44%1.62%1.87%2.44%1.90%0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


DWAW and RFDA 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.

DWAW has higher volatility (5.42%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DWAW dropped -31.55% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

On 5-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.17% vs 7.23% for DWAW. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 2.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 13.17% return vs 7.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 1.24% for DWAW.

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.66% for DWAW.

They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 1.24% for DWAW and 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.76), 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 DWAW and RFDA

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