DYNF vs. GXLC
DYNF (iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. DYNF is actively managed, while GXLC is passively managed. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. DYNF charges 0.26%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.
Performance
DYNF vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with DYNF having a 10.04% return and GXLC slightly lower at 9.76%.
DYNF
- 1D
- -1.62%
- 1M
- 0.13%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 6M
- 8.91%
- 1Y
- 27.42%
- 3Y*
- 25.19%
- 5Y*
- 14.71%
- 10Y*
- —
GXLC
- 1D
- -0.47%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 9.76%
- 6M
- 9.33%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DYNF vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
DYNF iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF | 10.04% | 3.35% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 9.76% | 3.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between DYNF and GXLC is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.97 |
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
DYNF vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank
DYNF
GXLC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
DYNF vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF (DYNF) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.
| DYNF | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.86 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DYNF vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DYNF drawdown since its inception was -34.72%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DYNF and GXLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DYNF | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.72% | -9.08% | -25.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.70% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.65% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.97% | -1.76% | -0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.94% | -1.53% | -4.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.85% | — | — |
Volatility
DYNF vs. GXLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DYNF | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.38% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.64% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.24% | 13.79% | -0.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.62% | 13.79% | +3.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.91% | 13.79% | +6.12% |
DYNF vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
DYNF has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
DYNF vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison
DYNF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%, more than GXLC's 0.64% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DYNF iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF | 0.81% | 1.01% | 0.65% | 1.11% | 1.66% | 2.89% | 1.52% | 1.22% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 0.64% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.97, DYNF and GXLC 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.
On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.26% for DYNF.
DYNF has the higher dividend yield at 0.81%, compared with 0.64% for GXLC.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for DYNF and 0.02% for GXLC.
Find the right allocation for DYNF and GXLC
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