NDAA vs. AVMA

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

NDAA (Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF) and AVMA (Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NDAA returned 20.40% vs 22.26% for AVMA. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NDAA charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for AVMA.

Performance

NDAA vs. AVMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF (NDAA) and Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF (AVMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NDAA achieves a 8.00% return, which is significantly lower than AVMA's 10.52% return.

NDAA

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: -2.45%
• YTD: 8.00%
• 6M: 7.27%
• 1Y: 20.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AVMA

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: 0.07%
• YTD: 10.52%
• 6M: 9.71%
• 1Y: 22.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NDAA vs. AVMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NDAA Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF	8.00%	14.00%	-1.48%
AVMA Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF	10.52%	16.72%	-1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between NDAA and AVMA is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2024	0.93

The correlation between NDAA and AVMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NDAA vs. AVMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

NDAA

NDAA Risk / Return Rank: 62
NDAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
NDAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
NDAA Omega Ratio Rank: 61
NDAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
NDAA Martin Ratio Rank: 68

AVMA

AVMA Risk / Return Rank: 84
AVMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
AVMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AVMA Omega Ratio Rank: 85
AVMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
AVMA Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

NDAA vs. AVMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF (NDAA) and Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF (AVMA). 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.

	NDAA	AVMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.81	2.39	-0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	3.40	-0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.45	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.69	3.49	-0.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.89	14.62	-3.73

NDAA vs. AVMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NDAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the AVMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NDAA and AVMA, 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

NDAA vs. AVMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NDAA drawdown since its inception was -13.50%, which is greater than AVMA's maximum drawdown of -11.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NDAA and AVMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	NDAA	AVMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.50%	-11.81%	-1.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.62%	-6.40%	-1.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.26%	-0.85%	-2.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.96%	-1.54%	-0.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.88%	1.53%	+0.35%

Volatility

NDAA vs. AVMA - Volatility Comparison

Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF (NDAA) has a higher volatility of 4.47% compared to Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF (AVMA) at 3.31%. This indicates that NDAA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AVMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NDAA	AVMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.47%	3.31%	+1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.19%	7.60%	+1.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.31%	9.37%	+1.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.19%	10.35%	+1.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.19%	10.35%	+1.84%

NDAA vs. AVMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

NDAA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than AVMA's 0.21% expense ratio.

Dividends

NDAA vs. AVMA - Dividend Comparison

NDAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, less than AVMA's 3.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
AVMA Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF	3.02%	2.21%	2.28%	1.11%
NDAA Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF	2.51%	2.71%	0.83%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NDAA and AVMA in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, NDAA and AVMA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, NDAA or AVMA?

NDAA has higher volatility (4.47%) compared to AVMA (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NDAA dropped -13.50% vs AVMA's -11.81%.

Which ETF is better, NDAA or AVMA?

On 1-year performance, AVMA leads with 22.26% vs 20.40% for NDAA. On fees, AVMA is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, AVMA has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NDAA or AVMA?

Over the 1-year period, AVMA has performed better with a 22.26% return vs 20.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NDAA or AVMA?

AVMA is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for NDAA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NDAA or AVMA?

AVMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.02%, compared with 2.51% for NDAA.

What is the main difference between NDAA and AVMA?

They also come from different issuers: Ned Davis Research and Avantis. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for NDAA and 0.21% for AVMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AVMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.81), 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.