FLV vs. DIVZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLV (American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF) and DIVZ (Opal Dividend Income ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLV returned 8.47%/yr vs 8.36%/yr for DIVZ. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FLV charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for DIVZ.

Performance

FLV vs. DIVZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) and Opal Dividend Income ETF (DIVZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLV achieves a 5.79% return, which is significantly higher than DIVZ's 3.10% return.

FLV

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 1.00%
• YTD: 5.79%
• 6M: 6.27%
• 1Y: 18.84%
• 3Y*: 13.48%
• 5Y*: 8.47%
• 10Y*: —

DIVZ

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -0.16%
• YTD: 3.10%
• 6M: 3.41%
• 1Y: 10.40%
• 3Y*: 15.03%
• 5Y*: 8.36%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLV vs. DIVZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FLV American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF	5.79%	15.80%	11.51%	6.23%	0.94%	17.51%
DIVZ Opal Dividend Income ETF	3.10%	16.72%	18.44%	-0.51%	3.51%	19.74%

Correlation

The correlation between FLV and DIVZ is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2021	0.85

The correlation between FLV and DIVZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.85 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLV vs. DIVZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLV	DIVZ
Financial Services	23.1%	8.7%
Healthcare	15.6%	16.0%
Consumer Defensive	13.5%	20.0%
Industrials	11.7%	4.6%
Technology	11.0%	8.0%
Energy	9.6%	19.4%
Utilities	5.4%	17.2%
Communication Services	3.6%	5.9%
Consumer Cyclical	3.4%	6.6%
Basic Materials	3.1%	5.7%
Real Estate	1.8%	-

Return for Risk

FLV vs. DIVZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLV

FLV Risk / Return Rank: 53
FLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
FLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FLV Omega Ratio Rank: 53
FLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
FLV Martin Ratio Rank: 47

DIVZ

DIVZ Risk / Return Rank: 31
DIVZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
DIVZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
DIVZ Omega Ratio Rank: 28
DIVZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
DIVZ Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

FLV vs. DIVZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) and Opal Dividend Income ETF (DIVZ). 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.

	FLV	DIVZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	1.13	+0.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	1.67	+1.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.19	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.51	1.79	+0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.88	4.44	+3.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLV vs. DIVZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is higher than the DIVZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLV and DIVZ, 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

	FLV	DIVZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.89	1.13	+0.76
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67	0.66	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	0.89	+0.18

Drawdowns

FLV vs. DIVZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLV drawdown since its inception was -15.06%, roughly equal to the maximum DIVZ drawdown of -15.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLV and DIVZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLV	DIVZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.06%	-15.42%	+0.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.53%	-5.83%	-1.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.42%	-9.52%	-2.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.06%	-15.42%	+0.36%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.32%	-4.50%	+2.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.73%	-3.49%	+0.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.40%	2.35%	+0.05%

Volatility

FLV vs. DIVZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) is 2.45%, while Opal Dividend Income ETF (DIVZ) has a volatility of 3.33%. This indicates that FLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DIVZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLV	DIVZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.45%	3.33%	-0.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.25%	7.02%	+0.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.03%	9.28%	+0.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.70%	12.65%	+0.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.25%	12.57%	+1.68%

FLV vs. DIVZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLV has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than DIVZ's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLV vs. DIVZ - Dividend Comparison

FLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, less than DIVZ's 2.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
DIVZ Opal Dividend Income ETF	2.60%	2.60%	2.63%	3.66%	3.23%	3.83%	0.00%
FLV American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF	1.67%	1.90%	2.07%	2.07%	4.98%	4.05%	0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLV and DIVZ in my portfolio?

FLV and DIVZ have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLV or DIVZ?

DIVZ has higher volatility (3.33%) compared to FLV (2.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLV dropped -15.06% vs DIVZ's -15.42%.

Which ETF is better, FLV or DIVZ?

On 5-year performance, FLV leads with 8.47% vs 8.36% for DIVZ. On fees, FLV is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, FLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLV or DIVZ?

Over the 5-year period, FLV has performed better with a 8.47% return vs 8.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLV or DIVZ?

FLV is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for DIVZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLV or DIVZ?

DIVZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 1.67% for FLV.

What is the main difference between FLV and DIVZ?

They also come from different issuers: American Century and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for FLV and 0.65% for DIVZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.13), 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.