RFFC vs. AFOS

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

RFFC (ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF) and AFOS (ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past year, RFFC returned 25.00% vs 71.54% for AFOS. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFFC charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for AFOS.

Performance

RFFC vs. AFOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF (AFOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 12.37% return, which is significantly lower than AFOS's 30.98% return.

RFFC

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: 1.81%
• 6M: 9.26%
• YTD: 12.37%
• 1Y: 25.00%
• 3Y*: 20.03%
• 5Y*: 12.09%
• 10Y*: 12.98%

AFOS

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: 1.47%
• 6M: 22.53%
• YTD: 30.98%
• 1Y: 71.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RFFC vs. AFOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF	12.37%	14.24%
AFOS ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF	30.98%	37.10%

Correlation

The correlation between RFFC and AFOS is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.80

The correlation between RFFC and AFOS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RFFC vs. AFOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFFC

RFFC Risk / Return Rank: 77
RFFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
RFFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
RFFC Omega Ratio Rank: 77
RFFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
RFFC Martin Ratio Rank: 81

AFOS

AFOS Risk / Return Rank: 95
AFOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
AFOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
AFOS Omega Ratio Rank: 93
AFOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
AFOS Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

RFFC vs. AFOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF (AFOS). 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.

	RFFC	AFOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	3.25	-1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	3.94	-1.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.52	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.71	6.24	-3.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.30	27.13	-14.83

RFFC vs. AFOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFFC Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is lower than the AFOS Sharpe Ratio of 3.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFFC and AFOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RFFC vs. AFOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, which is greater than AFOS's maximum drawdown of -11.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and AFOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFFC	AFOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.26%	-11.52%	-24.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.25%	-11.52%	+2.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.29%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.26%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.62%	-4.24%	+3.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.97%	-1.54%	-3.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.65%	-0.61%

Volatility

RFFC vs. AFOS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) is 2.99%, while ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF (AFOS) has a volatility of 8.31%. This indicates that RFFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AFOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFFC	AFOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.99%	8.31%	-5.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.86%	18.40%	-8.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.39%	22.12%	-9.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.33%	21.75%	-5.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.96%	21.75%	-3.79%

RFFC vs. AFOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than AFOS's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFFC vs. AFOS - Dividend Comparison

RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, more than AFOS's 0.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
AFOS ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF	0.23%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF	0.63%	0.78%	1.05%	1.35%	1.41%	0.71%	1.79%	1.34%	1.36%	0.93%	0.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFFC and AFOS in my portfolio?

RFFC and AFOS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFFC or AFOS?

AFOS has higher volatility (8.31%) compared to RFFC (2.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs AFOS's -11.52%.

Which ETF is better, RFFC or AFOS?

On 1-year performance, AFOS leads with 71.54% vs 25.00% for RFFC. On fees, AFOS is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, RFFC has been the lower-risk option at 2.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFFC or AFOS?

Over the 1-year period, AFOS has performed better with a 71.54% return vs 25.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFFC or AFOS?

AFOS is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for RFFC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RFFC or AFOS?

RFFC has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.23% for AFOS.

What is the main difference between RFFC and AFOS?

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and ARS Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.45% for AFOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AFOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs 2.03), 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.