REGS vs. RFDA

Last updated Jul 4, 2026

REGS (Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. REGS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.

Performance

REGS vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

REGS

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: -4.44%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RFDA

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 0.78%
• 6M: 12.58%
• YTD: 12.27%
• 1Y: 22.26%
• 3Y*: 17.98%
• 5Y*: 12.80%
• 10Y*: 13.75%

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

REGS vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
REGS Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF	9.85%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	13.86%

Correlation

The correlation between REGS and RFDA is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2026	0.43

Return for Risk

REGS vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

REGS

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

RFDA

RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 81
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
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.

REGS vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF (REGS) 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.

	REGS	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.02	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.80	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.37	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	4.30	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	15.23	—

Drawdowns

REGS vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum REGS drawdown since its inception was -7.59%, smaller than the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for REGS and RFDA.

Drawdown Indicators

	REGS	RFDA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.59%	-34.60%	+27.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-5.45%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.35%	—
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	-5.84%	-0.33%	-5.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.22%	-3.72%	+1.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.54%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	REGS	RFDA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.07%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.76%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.25%	11.65%	+8.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.25%	15.75%	+4.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.25%	16.85%	+3.40%

REGS vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

REGS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

REGS vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

REGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RFDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.78%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
REGS Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	1.78%	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 REGS and RFDA in my portfolio?

REGS and RFDA have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, REGS or RFDA?

On fees, REGS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, REGS or RFDA?

REGS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.

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

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 0.00% for REGS.

What is the main difference between REGS and RFDA?

They also come from different issuers: Columbia Threadneedle and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for REGS and 0.52% for RFDA.