FDIF vs. RFDA
FDIF (Fidelity Disruptors ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FDIF returned 22.85% vs 29.49% for RFDA. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDIF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.
Performance
FDIF vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDIF achieves a 10.12% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 11.40% return.
FDIF
- 1D
- -0.90%
- 1M
- 5.86%
- YTD
- 10.12%
- 6M
- 10.33%
- 1Y
- 22.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RFDA
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- 4.27%
- YTD
- 11.40%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- 1Y
- 29.49%
- 3Y*
- 19.19%
- 5Y*
- 13.17%
- 10Y*
- —
FDIF vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 10.12% | 13.83% | 19.74% | 6.49% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 11.40% | 16.42% | 20.12% | 6.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDIF 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2023 | 0.79 |
The correlation between FDIF and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
FDIF vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FDIF
RFDA
Technology
Healthcare
Communication Services
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
FDIF
RFDA
Healthcare
FDIF
RFDA
Communication Services
FDIF
RFDA
Industrials
FDIF
RFDA
Financial Services
FDIF
RFDA
Consumer Cyclical
FDIF
RFDA
Real Estate
FDIF
RFDA
Basic Materials
FDIF
-
RFDA
Consumer Defensive
FDIF
-
RFDA
Energy
FDIF
-
RFDA
Utilities
FDIF
-
RFDA
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
FDIF vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank
FDIF
RFDA
FDIF vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) 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.
| FDIF | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.35 | 2.55 | -1.20 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.91 | 3.52 | -1.60 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.47 | -0.23 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 5.44 | -3.89 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.86 | 19.87 | -14.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FDIF | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.35 | 2.55 | -1.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.84 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.93 | 0.79 | +0.14 |
Drawdowns
FDIF vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDIF drawdown since its inception was -22.63%, smaller than the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIF and RFDA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDIF | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.63% | -34.60% | +11.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.80% | -5.45% | -9.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.35% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.90% | -0.92% | +0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.83% | -3.74% | -0.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.91% | 1.49% | +2.42% |
Volatility
FDIF vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) has a higher volatility of 4.11% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.66%. This indicates that FDIF'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
| FDIF | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.11% | 2.66% | +1.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.37% | 8.47% | +4.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.02% | 11.64% | +5.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.59% | 15.73% | +2.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.59% | 16.85% | +1.74% |
FDIF vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDIF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDIF vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison
FDIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than RFDA's 1.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 0.30% | 0.36% | 0.35% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
FDIF 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.
FDIF has higher volatility (4.11%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDIF dropped -22.63% vs RFDA's -34.60%.
On 1-year performance, RFDA leads with 29.49% vs 22.85% for FDIF. On fees, FDIF is cheaper at 0.50% 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 1-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 29.49% return vs 22.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FDIF is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.
RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.30% for FDIF.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDIF and 0.52% for RFDA.
RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.35), 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.
Find the right allocation for FDIF 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