PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FAD vs. FDL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FAD vs. FDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) and First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund (FDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAD achieves a 17.25% return, which is significantly higher than FDL's 13.33% return. Over the past 10 years, FAD has outperformed FDL with an annualized return of 14.53%, while FDL has yielded a comparatively lower 11.24% annualized return.


FAD

1D
-0.15%
1M
6.70%
YTD
17.25%
6M
17.16%
1Y
34.52%
3Y*
24.16%
5Y*
11.25%
10Y*
14.53%

FDL

1D
-0.26%
1M
-0.26%
YTD
13.33%
6M
14.76%
1Y
23.67%
3Y*
18.97%
5Y*
12.51%
10Y*
11.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FAD vs. FDL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FAD
First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
17.25%17.23%23.85%19.07%-24.06%21.17%34.92%26.66%-6.45%25.75%
FDL
First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund
13.33%14.79%17.98%2.94%6.66%26.10%-4.30%24.41%-5.99%12.02%

Correlation

The correlation between FAD and FDL is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.19

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

0.43

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

0.53

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2007

0.57

Over the past year, the correlation between FAD and FDL has dropped to 0.19 - well below their long-term average of 0.57, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FAD vs. FDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FAD
FDL

Industrials

26.1%
3.8%

Technology

24.1%
1.1%

Healthcare

15.4%
16.8%

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
3.8%

Financial Services

8.0%
15.1%

Real Estate

4.1%

-

Communication Services

3.1%
10.6%

Basic Materials

3.0%
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
14.7%

Energy

1.6%
27.3%

Utilities

1.6%
6.5%

Industrials

FAD
26.1%
FDL
3.8%

Technology

FAD
24.1%
FDL
1.1%

Healthcare

FAD
15.4%
FDL
16.8%

Consumer Cyclical

FAD
10.8%
FDL
3.8%

Financial Services

FAD
8.0%
FDL
15.1%

Real Estate

FAD
4.1%
FDL

-

Communication Services

FAD
3.1%
FDL
10.6%

Basic Materials

FAD
3.0%
FDL
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

FAD
2.4%
FDL
14.7%

Energy

FAD
1.6%
FDL
27.3%

Utilities

FAD
1.6%
FDL
6.5%

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

FAD vs. FDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAD
FAD Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
FAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FAD Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
FAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
FAD Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

FDL
FDL Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
FDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDL Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
FDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDL Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

FAD vs. FDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) and First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund (FDL). 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.


FADFDLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.37

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.25

5.56

-2.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.54

13.56

-1.01

FAD vs. FDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAD Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the FDL Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAD and FDL, 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


FADFDLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.88

2.11

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

0.88

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.69

0.66

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.45

+0.05

Drawdowns

FAD vs. FDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAD drawdown since its inception was -54.33%, smaller than the maximum FDL drawdown of -65.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAD and FDL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FADFDLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-54.33%

-65.93%

+11.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.66%

-4.27%

-6.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.55%

-12.24%

-11.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.99%

-16.46%

-15.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.25%

-41.40%

+4.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

-2.18%

+2.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.64%

-9.66%

+0.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.76%

1.75%

+1.01%

Volatility

FAD vs. FDL - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund (FDL) at 2.85%. This indicates that FAD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FADFDLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.01%

2.85%

+3.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.14%

7.87%

+6.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.50%

11.28%

+7.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.53%

14.31%

+6.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.18%

17.11%

+4.07%

FAD vs. FDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAD has a 0.63% expense ratio, which is higher than FDL's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

FAD vs. FDL - Dividend Comparison

FAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than FDL's 3.68% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FAD
First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
0.09%0.09%0.59%0.51%0.60%0.09%0.32%0.48%0.20%0.22%0.64%0.41%
FDL
First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund
3.68%4.04%4.96%4.58%3.58%4.59%4.48%3.75%3.97%3.18%2.93%3.65%

Frequently Asked Questions


FAD and FDL have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FAD has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to FDL (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAD dropped -54.33% vs FDL's -65.93%.

On 10-year performance, FAD leads with 14.53% vs 11.24% for FDL. On fees, FDL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FDL has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FAD has performed better with a 14.53% return vs 11.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for FAD.

FDL has the higher dividend yield at 3.68%, compared with 0.09% for FAD.

FAD is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while FDL is Large Cap Value Equities. FAD tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Multi Cap Growth Index, while FDL tracks Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index. Their fees differ too: 0.63% for FAD and 0.45% for FDL.

FDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.88), 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 FAD and FDL

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