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

Performance

FFTY vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) 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, FFTY achieves a 20.94% return, which is significantly higher than RFDA's 10.77% return. Over the past 10 years, FFTY has underperformed RFDA with an annualized return of 7.91%, while RFDA has yielded a comparatively higher 13.39% annualized return.


FFTY

1D
-4.21%
1M
5.39%
YTD
20.94%
6M
18.21%
1Y
36.43%
3Y*
21.26%
5Y*
-0.44%
10Y*
7.91%

RFDA

1D
0.22%
1M
0.36%
YTD
10.77%
6M
9.90%
1Y
26.59%
3Y*
18.80%
5Y*
12.89%
10Y*
13.39%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FFTY vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FFTY
Innovator IBD 50 ETF
20.94%23.38%18.36%12.40%-51.08%11.92%18.20%25.74%-16.76%37.62%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
10.77%16.42%20.12%16.98%-8.58%25.94%11.26%27.15%-9.27%19.86%

Correlation

The correlation between FFTY and RFDA is 0.52, 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

0.52

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

0.64

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

0.66

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

0.68

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

0.68

The correlation between FFTY and RFDA shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.68 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FFTY vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FFTY
RFDA

Technology

39.4%
21.1%

Industrials

23.1%
8.6%

Healthcare

12.8%
9.7%

Energy

7.3%
11.7%

Financial Services

6.7%
14.4%

Basic Materials

2.9%
1.9%

Communication Services

2.8%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%
7.0%

Consumer Cyclical

2.3%
7.4%

Utilities

2.1%
4.8%

Real Estate

-

4.9%

Technology

FFTY
39.4%
RFDA
21.1%

Industrials

FFTY
23.1%
RFDA
8.6%

Healthcare

FFTY
12.8%
RFDA
9.7%

Energy

FFTY
7.3%
RFDA
11.7%

Financial Services

FFTY
6.7%
RFDA
14.4%

Basic Materials

FFTY
2.9%
RFDA
1.9%

Communication Services

FFTY
2.8%
RFDA
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

FFTY
2.8%
RFDA
7.0%

Consumer Cyclical

FFTY
2.3%
RFDA
7.4%

Utilities

FFTY
2.1%
RFDA
4.8%

Real Estate

FFTY

-

RFDA
4.9%

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

FFTY vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFTY
FFTY Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
FFTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFTY Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
FFTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFTY Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

RFDA
RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

FFTY vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) 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.


FFTYRFDADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.42

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.57

4.90

-3.33

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.14

17.52

-13.38

FFTY vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFTY Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFTY 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

FFTY vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFTY drawdown since its inception was -59.46%, which is greater than RFDA's maximum drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFTY and RFDA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FFTYRFDADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.46%

-34.60%

-24.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.29%

-5.45%

-17.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.60%

-19.35%

-10.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-59.46%

-19.35%

-40.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-59.46%

-34.60%

-24.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.76%

-1.67%

-13.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.34%

-3.73%

-18.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.82%

1.52%

+7.30%

Volatility

FFTY vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) has a higher volatility of 13.44% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 3.29%. This indicates that FFTY'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


FFTYRFDADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.44%

3.29%

+10.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.50%

8.77%

+19.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.99%

11.72%

+24.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.63%

15.75%

+13.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.67%

16.87%

+10.80%

FFTY vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFTY has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

FFTY vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

FFTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, less than RFDA's 1.80% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
FFTY
Innovator IBD 50 ETF
1.11%1.35%0.91%0.65%2.75%0.22%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.17%0.00%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
1.80%1.89%2.23%2.68%3.57%1.44%1.62%1.87%2.44%1.90%0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


FFTY and RFDA have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFTY has higher volatility (13.44%) compared to RFDA (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFTY dropped -59.46% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

On 10-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.39% vs 7.91% for FFTY. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. 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 13.39% return vs 7.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FFTY.

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 1.11% for FFTY.

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FFTY and 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.02), 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 FFTY 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