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

Performance

EQL vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) 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, EQL achieves a 10.57% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 13.64% return. Over the past 10 years, EQL has underperformed RFDA with an annualized return of 12.31%, while RFDA has yielded a comparatively higher 13.49% annualized return.


EQL

1D
-0.02%
1M
1.02%
6M
7.84%
YTD
10.57%
1Y
16.83%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
10.73%
10Y*
12.31%

RFDA

1D
0.20%
1M
1.43%
6M
12.80%
YTD
13.64%
1Y
24.28%
3Y*
18.25%
5Y*
12.84%
10Y*
13.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EQL vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EQL
ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF
10.57%13.09%16.44%16.87%-10.72%29.32%10.87%27.87%-6.12%18.37%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
13.64%16.42%20.12%16.98%-8.58%25.94%11.26%27.15%-9.27%19.86%

Correlation

The correlation between EQL and RFDA is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.84

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

0.88

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2016

0.88

The correlation between EQL and RFDA shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (1 year) to 0.88 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EQL vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EQL
RFDA

Technology

12.3%
21.1%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
7.4%

Real Estate

9.2%
4.9%

Communication Services

8.8%
8.3%

Healthcare

8.7%
9.7%

Consumer Defensive

8.6%
7.0%

Financial Services

8.6%
14.4%

Industrials

8.5%
8.6%

Utilities

8.4%
4.8%

Energy

8.0%
11.7%

Basic Materials

8.0%
1.9%

Technology

EQL
12.3%
RFDA
21.1%

Consumer Cyclical

EQL
10.7%
RFDA
7.4%

Real Estate

EQL
9.2%
RFDA
4.9%

Communication Services

EQL
8.8%
RFDA
8.3%

Healthcare

EQL
8.7%
RFDA
9.7%

Consumer Defensive

EQL
8.6%
RFDA
7.0%

Financial Services

EQL
8.6%
RFDA
14.4%

Industrials

EQL
8.5%
RFDA
8.6%

Utilities

EQL
8.4%
RFDA
4.8%

Energy

EQL
8.0%
RFDA
11.7%

Basic Materials

EQL
8.0%
RFDA
1.9%

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

EQL vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQL
EQL Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

RFDA
RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

EQL vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) 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.

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.


EQLRFDADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.39

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.73

4.48

-1.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.48

15.88

-5.40

EQL vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQL Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is comparable to the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQL 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...

Drawdowns

EQL vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQL drawdown since its inception was -35.65%, roughly equal to the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQL and RFDA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EQLRFDADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.65%

-34.60%

-1.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.19%

-5.45%

-0.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.07%

-19.35%

+4.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.24%

-19.35%

+0.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.65%

-34.60%

-1.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.28%

0.00%

-0.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.24%

-3.72%

+0.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.61%

1.53%

+0.08%

Volatility

EQL vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) has a higher volatility of 2.60% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.41%. This indicates that EQL'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


EQLRFDADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.60%

2.41%

+0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.11%

8.76%

-1.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.53%

11.59%

-2.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.55%

15.74%

-1.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.49%

16.84%

-0.35%

EQL vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQL has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

EQL vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

EQL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, less than RFDA's 1.76% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EQL
ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF
1.36%1.73%1.78%1.96%2.14%1.69%2.29%1.95%2.39%1.97%2.89%2.07%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
1.76%1.89%2.23%2.68%3.57%1.44%1.62%1.87%2.44%1.90%0.98%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EQL and RFDA have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EQL has higher volatility (2.60%) compared to RFDA (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQL dropped -35.65% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

On 10-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.49% vs 12.31% for EQL. On fees, EQL is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 13.49% return vs 12.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EQL is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.76%, compared with 1.36% for EQL.

EQL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while RFDA is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for EQL and 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.78), 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 EQL 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