RFDA vs. ACES
RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFDA is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by SS&C, while ACES is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. RFDA is actively managed, while ACES is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFDA returned 13.17%/yr vs -8.73%/yr for ACES. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFDA charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ACES.
Performance
RFDA vs. ACES - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFDA achieves a 11.40% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 28.72% return.
RFDA
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- 4.27%
- YTD
- 11.40%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- 1Y
- 29.49%
- 3Y*
- 19.19%
- 5Y*
- 13.17%
- 10Y*
- —
ACES
- 1D
- -2.84%
- 1M
- 17.92%
- YTD
- 28.72%
- 6M
- 27.36%
- 1Y
- 69.96%
- 3Y*
- -1.21%
- 5Y*
- -8.73%
- 10Y*
- —
RFDA vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 11.40% | 16.42% | 20.12% | 16.98% | -8.58% | 25.94% | 11.26% | 27.15% | -12.17% |
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF | 28.72% | 25.44% | -26.71% | -20.04% | -28.44% | -19.44% | 140.33% | 51.70% | -9.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFDA and ACES is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018 | 0.61 |
The correlation between RFDA and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
RFDA vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFDA
ACES
Technology
Financial Services
Energy
Industrials
Healthcare
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
-
Utilities
Basic Materials
Technology
RFDA
ACES
Financial Services
RFDA
ACES
Energy
RFDA
ACES
Industrials
RFDA
ACES
Healthcare
RFDA
ACES
-
Communication Services
RFDA
ACES
-
Consumer Defensive
RFDA
ACES
Consumer Cyclical
RFDA
ACES
Real Estate
RFDA
ACES
-
Utilities
RFDA
ACES
Basic Materials
RFDA
ACES
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
RFDA vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank
RFDA
ACES
RFDA vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). 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.
| RFDA | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.33 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.44 | 4.03 | +1.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.87 | 10.16 | +9.71 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RFDA | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.55 | 2.18 | +0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 | -0.24 | +1.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 0.22 | +0.58 |
Drawdowns
RFDA vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFDA drawdown since its inception was -34.60%, smaller than the maximum ACES drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFDA and ACES.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFDA | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.60% | -79.05% | +44.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.45% | -17.44% | +11.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.35% | -58.68% | +39.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.35% | -74.44% | +55.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.92% | -56.41% | +55.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.74% | -38.87% | +35.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.49% | 6.91% | -5.42% |
Volatility
RFDA vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) is 2.66%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 9.99%. This indicates that RFDA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFDA | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.66% | 9.99% | -7.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.47% | 22.55% | -14.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.64% | 32.42% | -20.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.73% | 36.17% | -20.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.85% | 35.59% | -18.74% |
RFDA vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFDA has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is lower than ACES's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFDA vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison
RFDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, more than ACES's 0.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF | 0.54% | 0.70% | 1.10% | 1.44% | 1.08% | 0.71% | 0.56% | 1.79% | 0.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 1.77% | 1.89% | 2.23% | 2.68% | 3.57% | 1.44% | 1.62% | 1.87% | 2.44% | 1.90% | 0.98% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFDA and ACES have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACES has higher volatility (9.99%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFDA dropped -34.60% vs ACES's -79.05%.
On 5-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.17% vs -8.73% for ACES. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 2.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 13.17% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ACES.
RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.54% for ACES.
RFDA is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while ACES is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for RFDA and 0.55% for ACES.
RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 2.18), 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.
Find the right allocation for RFDA and ACES
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