GK vs. RFDA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GK (AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GK returned 18.34%/yr vs 18.80%/yr for RFDA. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GK charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.

Performance

GK vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF (GK) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GK achieves a 13.03% return, which is significantly higher than RFDA's 10.77% return.

GK

• 1D: -2.88%
• 1M: 1.29%
• YTD: 13.03%
• 6M: 11.47%
• 1Y: 27.18%
• 3Y*: 18.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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)

GK vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GK AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF	13.03%	17.78%	20.10%	21.19%	-42.76%	4.61%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	10.77%	16.42%	20.12%	16.98%	-8.58%	9.51%

Correlation

The correlation between GK and RFDA is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2021	0.77

The correlation between GK and RFDA shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.77 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GK vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GK	RFDA
Technology	37.9%	21.1%
Industrials	16.9%	8.6%
Communication Services	16.3%	8.3%
Healthcare	8.0%	9.7%
Financial Services	6.9%	14.4%
Utilities	5.2%	4.8%
Consumer Cyclical	2.9%	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	7.0%
Basic Materials	-	1.9%
Energy	-	11.7%
Real Estate	-	4.9%

Return for Risk

GK vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

GK

GK Risk / Return Rank: 42
GK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
GK Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
GK Omega Ratio Rank: 43
GK Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
GK Martin Ratio Rank: 43

RFDA

RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 81
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

GK vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF (GK) 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.

	GK	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	2.28	-0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	3.14	-1.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.42	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.80	4.90	-3.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.74	17.52	-10.78

GK vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GK Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GK 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.

Drawdowns

GK vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GK drawdown since its inception was -47.72%, which is greater than RFDA's maximum drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GK and RFDA.

Drawdown Indicators

	GK	RFDA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.72%	-34.60%	-13.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.13%	-5.45%	-9.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.62%	-19.35%	-4.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.35%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.03%	-1.67%	-2.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.77%	-3.73%	-20.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.04%	1.52%	+2.52%

Volatility

GK vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF (GK) has a higher volatility of 8.10% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 3.29%. This indicates that GK'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.

Volatility by Period

	GK	RFDA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.10%	3.29%	+4.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.03%	8.77%	+6.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.71%	11.72%	+6.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.02%	15.75%	+8.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.02%	16.87%	+7.15%

GK vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

GK has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

GK vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

GK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than RFDA's 1.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GK AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF	0.07%	0.08%	0.00%	0.13%	1.30%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both GK and RFDA in my portfolio?

GK and RFDA have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GK or RFDA?

GK has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to RFDA (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GK dropped -47.72% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

Which ETF is better, GK or RFDA?

On 3-year performance, RFDA leads with 18.80% vs 18.34% for GK. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, GK or RFDA?

Over the 3-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 18.80% return vs 18.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GK or RFDA?

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GK.

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

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 0.07% for GK.

What is the main difference between GK and RFDA?

They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GK and 0.52% for RFDA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.46), 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.