PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FVC vs. RLY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FVC vs. RLY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) and SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FVC having a 17.41% return and RLY slightly lower at 16.97%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FVC having a 8.56% annualized return and RLY not far behind at 8.49%.


FVC

1D
0.09%
1M
9.77%
YTD
17.41%
6M
18.28%
1Y
23.60%
3Y*
11.09%
5Y*
5.00%
10Y*
8.56%

RLY

1D
-0.14%
1M
-1.13%
YTD
16.97%
6M
17.67%
1Y
31.60%
3Y*
15.21%
5Y*
10.40%
10Y*
8.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FVC vs. RLY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FVC
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF
17.41%2.12%12.43%-4.59%-6.03%21.92%12.71%19.28%-8.60%19.74%
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
16.97%20.26%2.53%2.56%7.86%22.85%-0.59%15.63%-11.72%10.40%

Correlation

The correlation between FVC and RLY is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.36

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

0.43

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

0.57

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2016

0.58

Over the past year, the correlation between FVC and RLY has dropped to 0.36 - well below their long-term average of 0.58, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FVC vs. RLY - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FVC
RLY

Technology

29.0%

-

Industrials

27.8%
16.5%

Financial Services

19.8%
0.0%

Healthcare

19.4%
0.8%

Energy

17.5%
30.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.4%
2.6%

Communication Services

6.3%

-

Real Estate

0.7%
5.4%

Basic Materials

-

25.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

3.6%

Utilities

-

15.9%

Technology

FVC
29.0%
RLY

-

Industrials

FVC
27.8%
RLY
16.5%

Financial Services

FVC
19.8%
RLY
0.0%

Healthcare

FVC
19.4%
RLY
0.8%

Energy

FVC
17.5%
RLY
30.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FVC
6.4%
RLY
2.6%

Communication Services

FVC
6.3%
RLY

-

Real Estate

FVC
0.7%
RLY
5.4%

Basic Materials

FVC

-

RLY
25.1%

Consumer Defensive

FVC

-

RLY
3.6%

Utilities

FVC

-

RLY
15.9%

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

FVC vs. RLY — Risk / Return Rank

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

FVC
FVC Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
FVC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FVC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
FVC Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
FVC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
FVC Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

RLY
RLY Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
RLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLY Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
RLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLY Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

FVC vs. RLY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) and SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY). 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.


FVCRLYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.59

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.78

8.55

-6.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.00

30.82

-23.82

FVC vs. RLY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FVC Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is lower than the RLY Sharpe Ratio of 3.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FVC and RLY, 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


FVCRLYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.83

3.15

-1.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.77

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

0.62

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.37

+0.12

Drawdowns

FVC vs. RLY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FVC drawdown since its inception was -30.96%, smaller than the maximum RLY drawdown of -37.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FVC and RLY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FVCRLYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.96%

-37.75%

+6.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.32%

-3.71%

-9.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.75%

-10.08%

-4.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.62%

-18.94%

-3.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.96%

-34.17%

+3.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.74%

+1.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.06%

-9.45%

+2.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.38%

1.03%

+2.35%

Volatility

FVC vs. RLY - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) has a higher volatility of 4.19% compared to SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) at 2.91%. This indicates that FVC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RLY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FVCRLYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.19%

2.91%

+1.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.37%

8.14%

+4.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.94%

10.07%

+2.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.29%

13.53%

+2.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.61%

13.81%

+3.80%

FVC vs. RLY - Expense Ratio Comparison

FVC has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is higher than RLY's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FVC vs. RLY - Dividend Comparison

FVC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, less than RLY's 2.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FVC
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF
1.91%2.57%0.78%1.89%1.50%0.09%0.21%1.07%0.24%0.63%0.67%0.00%
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
2.87%3.24%3.31%3.71%5.66%12.15%2.16%3.45%2.76%1.85%2.07%1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions


FVC and RLY have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FVC has higher volatility (4.19%) compared to RLY (2.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FVC dropped -30.96% vs RLY's -37.75%.

On 10-year performance, FVC leads with 8.56% vs 8.49% for RLY. On fees, RLY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, RLY has been the lower-risk option at 2.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FVC has performed better with a 8.56% return vs 8.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RLY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for FVC.

RLY has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 1.91% for FVC.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for FVC and 0.50% for RLY.

RLY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.15 vs 1.83), 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 FVC and RLY

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