PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RFDA vs. GRW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RFDA vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


RFDA

1D
-0.92%
1M
4.27%
YTD
11.40%
6M
12.25%
1Y
29.49%
3Y*
19.19%
5Y*
13.17%
10Y*

GRW

1D
-0.32%
1M
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFDA vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RFDA and GRW is 0.20, 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 May 29, 2026

0.20

RFDA vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFDA
GRW

Technology

19.9%
26.6%

Financial Services

14.7%
9.8%

Energy

12.5%

-

Industrials

8.9%
38.1%

Healthcare

8.8%
4.1%

Communication Services

8.8%
9.1%

Consumer Defensive

7.6%

-

Consumer Cyclical

7.0%
8.3%

Real Estate

5.0%

-

Utilities

5.0%

-

Basic Materials

1.8%
4.0%

Technology

RFDA
19.9%
GRW
26.6%

Financial Services

RFDA
14.7%
GRW
9.8%

Energy

RFDA
12.5%
GRW

-

Industrials

RFDA
8.9%
GRW
38.1%

Healthcare

RFDA
8.8%
GRW
4.1%

Communication Services

RFDA
8.8%
GRW
9.1%

Consumer Defensive

RFDA
7.6%
GRW

-

Consumer Cyclical

RFDA
7.0%
GRW
8.3%

Real Estate

RFDA
5.0%
GRW

-

Utilities

RFDA
5.0%
GRW

-

Basic Materials

RFDA
1.8%
GRW
4.0%

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. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFDA
RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

GRW
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.

RFDA vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.


RFDAGRWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.87

RFDA vs. GRW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RFDAGRWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.55

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

14.00

-13.20

Drawdowns

RFDA vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFDA drawdown since its inception was -34.60%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFDA and GRW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFDAGRWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.60%

-0.45%

-34.15%

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%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.92%

-0.45%

-0.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.74%

-0.14%

-3.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.49%

Volatility

RFDA vs. GRW - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFDAGRWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.64%

10.19%

+1.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.73%

10.19%

+5.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.85%

10.19%

+6.66%

RFDA vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFDA has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFDA vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

RFDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
GRW
TCW Durable 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
1.77%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 GRW have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for RFDA and 0.75% for GRW.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RFDA and GRW

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