RFDA vs. EMB
RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) and EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFDA is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by SS&C, while EMB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPMorgan EMBI Global Core Index. RFDA is actively managed, while EMB is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFDA returned 13.17%/yr vs 1.86%/yr for EMB. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RFDA charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for EMB.
Performance
RFDA vs. EMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFDA achieves a 11.40% return, which is significantly higher than EMB's 1.80% return.
RFDA
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- 4.27%
- YTD
- 11.40%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- 1Y
- 29.49%
- 3Y*
- 19.19%
- 5Y*
- 13.17%
- 10Y*
- —
EMB
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 1.93%
- 1Y
- 11.56%
- 3Y*
- 9.74%
- 5Y*
- 1.86%
- 10Y*
- 3.29%
RFDA vs. EMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 11.40% | 16.42% | 20.12% | 16.98% | -8.58% | 25.94% | 11.26% | 27.15% | -9.27% | 19.86% |
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 1.80% | 13.85% | 5.54% | 10.62% | -18.63% | -2.23% | 5.42% | 15.48% | -5.47% | 10.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFDA and EMB is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2016 | 0.45 |
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. EMB — Risk / Return Rank
RFDA
EMB
RFDA vs. EMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB). 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 | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.41 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.44 | 2.58 | +2.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.87 | 11.01 | +8.86 |
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 | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.55 | 2.09 | +0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 | 0.19 | +0.65 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.33 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 0.44 | +0.36 |
Drawdowns
RFDA vs. EMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFDA drawdown since its inception was -34.60%, roughly equal to the maximum EMB drawdown of -34.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFDA and EMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFDA | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.60% | -34.70% | +0.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.45% | -4.51% | -0.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.35% | -7.95% | -11.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.35% | -28.74% | +9.39% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -28.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.92% | -0.37% | -0.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.74% | -5.06% | +1.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.49% | 1.05% | +0.44% |
Volatility
RFDA vs. EMB - Volatility Comparison
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) has a higher volatility of 2.66% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) at 1.85%. This indicates that RFDA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFDA | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.66% | 1.85% | +0.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.47% | 4.52% | +3.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.64% | 5.56% | +6.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.73% | 9.75% | +5.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.85% | 9.96% | +6.89% |
RFDA vs. EMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFDA has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than EMB's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFDA vs. EMB - Dividend Comparison
RFDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than EMB's 5.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.06% | 4.98% | 5.46% | 4.74% | 5.04% | 3.89% | 3.88% | 4.51% | 5.64% | 4.54% | 4.83% | 4.84% |
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% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFDA and EMB have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFDA has higher volatility (2.66%) compared to EMB (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFDA dropped -34.60% vs EMB's -34.70%.
On 5-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.17% vs 1.86% for EMB. On fees, EMB is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. 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 1.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMB is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.
EMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.06%, compared with 1.77% for RFDA.
RFDA is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while EMB is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for RFDA and 0.39% for EMB.
RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 2.09), 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 EMB
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