PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RFCI vs. FFUT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RFCI vs. FFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in RiverFront Dynamic Core Income ETF (RFCI) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFCI achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly lower than FFUT's 8.83% return.


RFCI

1D
0.11%
1M
0.56%
YTD
0.35%
6M
0.55%
1Y
3.92%
3Y*
4.63%
5Y*
1.21%
10Y*
2.08%

FFUT

1D
-0.36%
1M
-2.69%
YTD
8.83%
6M
9.28%
1Y
18.72%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFCI vs. FFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
RFCI
RiverFront Dynamic Core Income ETF
0.35%4.00%
FFUT
Fidelity Managed Futures ETF
8.83%8.58%

Correlation

The correlation between RFCI and FFUT is -0.33, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.33

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025

-0.34

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

RFCI vs. FFUT — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFCI
RFCI Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
RFCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFCI Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
RFCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFCI Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

FFUT
FFUT Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
FFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
FFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

RFCI vs. FFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverFront Dynamic Core Income ETF (RFCI) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). 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.


RFCIFFUTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.78

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.32

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.49

4.35

-2.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.24

14.55

-10.31

RFCI vs. FFUT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFCI Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the FFUT Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFCI and FFUT, 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...

Drawdowns

RFCI vs. FFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFCI drawdown since its inception was -14.18%, which is greater than FFUT's maximum drawdown of -4.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFCI and FFUT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFCIFFUTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.18%

-4.33%

-9.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.65%

-4.33%

+1.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-14.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.16%

-4.33%

+3.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.22%

-0.96%

-2.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.93%

1.29%

-0.36%

Volatility

RFCI vs. FFUT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RiverFront Dynamic Core Income ETF (RFCI) is 1.00%, while Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT) has a volatility of 2.93%. This indicates that RFCI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFCIFFUTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.00%

2.93%

-1.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.69%

8.97%

-6.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.52%

11.22%

-7.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.13%

11.02%

-5.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.94%

11.02%

-6.08%

RFCI vs. FFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFCI has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than FFUT's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFCI vs. FFUT - Dividend Comparison

RFCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.55%, more than FFUT's 1.92% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
FFUT
Fidelity Managed Futures ETF
1.92%2.09%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RFCI
RiverFront Dynamic Core Income ETF
4.55%4.55%4.30%3.55%2.26%3.45%2.04%2.66%2.76%2.03%1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions


RFCI and FFUT have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFUT has higher volatility (2.93%) compared to RFCI (1.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFCI dropped -14.18% vs FFUT's -4.33%.

On 1-year performance, FFUT leads with 18.72% vs 3.92% for RFCI. On fees, RFCI is cheaper at 0.54% per year. On volatility, RFCI has been the lower-risk option at 1.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FFUT has performed better with a 18.72% return vs 3.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFCI is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FFUT.

RFCI has the higher dividend yield at 4.55%, compared with 1.92% for FFUT.

RFCI is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while FFUT is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for RFCI and 0.80% for FFUT.

FFUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs 1.12), 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 RFCI and FFUT

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