FELC vs. RFDA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FELC (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FELC returned 28.58% vs 29.49% for RFDA. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FELC charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.

Performance

FELC vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF (FELC) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with FELC having a 11.23% return and RFDA slightly higher at 11.40%.

FELC

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: 5.59%
• YTD: 11.23%
• 6M: 11.57%
• 1Y: 28.58%
• 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*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FELC vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FELC Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF	11.23%	17.09%	25.25%	5.68%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	11.40%	16.42%	20.12%	5.50%

Correlation

The correlation between FELC and RFDA is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2023	0.87

The correlation between FELC and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FELC vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FELC	RFDA
Technology	38.2%	19.9%
Communication Services	12.4%	8.8%
Financial Services	12.2%	14.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	7.0%
Industrials	9.6%	8.9%
Healthcare	7.4%	8.8%
Energy	3.7%	12.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	7.6%
Basic Materials	1.5%	1.8%
Utilities	1.3%	5.0%
Real Estate	1.0%	5.0%

Return for Risk

FELC vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FELC

FELC Risk / Return Rank: 70
FELC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
FELC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
FELC Omega Ratio Rank: 71
FELC Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FELC Martin Ratio Rank: 75

RFDA

RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 83
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 79
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

FELC vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF (FELC) 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.

	FELC	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.55	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	3.52	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.47	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.16	5.44	-2.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.66	19.87	-5.21
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FELC vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FELC Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FELC 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FELC	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	2.55	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.84	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.59	0.79	+0.80

Drawdowns

FELC vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FELC drawdown since its inception was -18.59%, smaller than the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FELC and RFDA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FELC	RFDA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.59%	-34.60%	+16.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.09%	-5.45%	-3.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.35%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.59%	-0.92%	+0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-3.74%	+1.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.95%	1.49%	+0.46%

Volatility

FELC vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF (FELC) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) have volatilities of 2.78% and 2.66%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FELC	RFDA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.78%	2.66%	+0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.93%	8.47%	+0.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.90%	11.64%	+0.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.17%	15.73%	-0.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.17%	16.85%	-1.68%

FELC vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FELC has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

FELC vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

FELC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, less than RFDA's 1.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FELC Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF	0.85%	0.92%	1.03%	0.04%	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

Can I hold both FELC and RFDA in my portfolio?

FELC and RFDA have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FELC or RFDA?

FELC has higher volatility (2.78%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELC dropped -18.59% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

Which ETF is better, FELC or RFDA?

On 1-year performance, RFDA leads with 29.49% vs 28.58% for FELC. On fees, FELC is cheaper at 0.18% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, FELC or RFDA?

Over the 1-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 29.49% return vs 28.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FELC or RFDA?

FELC is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FELC or RFDA?

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.85% for FELC.

What is the main difference between FELC and RFDA?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FELC and 0.52% for RFDA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 2.41), 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.