RFFC vs. MGC
RFFC (ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF) and MGC (Vanguard Mega Cap ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. RFFC is actively managed, while MGC is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFFC returned 12.66%/yr vs 16.33%/yr for MGC. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFFC charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for MGC.
Performance
RFFC vs. MGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 10.13% return, which is significantly higher than MGC's 7.43% return. Over the past 10 years, RFFC has underperformed MGC with an annualized return of 12.66%, while MGC has yielded a comparatively higher 16.33% annualized return.
RFFC
- 1D
- -0.84%
- 1M
- 0.61%
- YTD
- 10.13%
- 6M
- 9.43%
- 1Y
- 27.11%
- 3Y*
- 20.79%
- 5Y*
- 11.91%
- 10Y*
- 12.66%
MGC
- 1D
- -1.49%
- 1M
- -1.89%
- YTD
- 7.43%
- 6M
- 6.54%
- 1Y
- 24.48%
- 3Y*
- 21.92%
- 5Y*
- 13.65%
- 10Y*
- 16.33%
RFFC vs. MGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF | 10.13% | 16.83% | 23.51% | 19.50% | -14.58% | 22.33% | 12.48% | 24.77% | -10.23% | 21.02% |
MGC Vanguard Mega Cap ETF | 7.43% | 19.31% | 27.16% | 29.77% | -19.95% | 27.58% | 21.57% | 31.14% | -3.45% | 22.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFFC and MGC is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2016 | 0.92 |
The correlation between RFFC and MGC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
RFFC vs. MGC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFFC
MGC
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
RFFC
MGC
Industrials
RFFC
MGC
Healthcare
RFFC
MGC
Financial Services
RFFC
MGC
Consumer Cyclical
RFFC
MGC
Communication Services
RFFC
MGC
Energy
RFFC
MGC
Consumer Defensive
RFFC
MGC
Utilities
RFFC
MGC
Basic Materials
RFFC
MGC
Real Estate
RFFC
MGC
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
RFFC vs. MGC — Risk / Return Rank
RFFC
MGC
RFFC vs. MGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC). 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 | MGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.34 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.94 | 2.50 | +0.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.37 | 10.77 | +2.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFFC vs. MGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, smaller than the maximum MGC drawdown of -52.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and MGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFFC | MGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.26% | -52.26% | +16.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.25% | -9.85% | +0.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.45% | -19.28% | +0.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.29% | -25.74% | +3.45% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.26% | -33.07% | -3.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.55% | -3.81% | +2.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.00% | -7.17% | +2.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | 2.28% | -0.25% |
Volatility
RFFC vs. MGC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) is 4.25%, while Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) has a volatility of 5.22%. This indicates that RFFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFFC | MGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.25% | 5.22% | -0.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.88% | 10.32% | -0.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.45% | 13.08% | -0.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.33% | 17.39% | -1.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.01% | 18.24% | -0.23% |
RFFC vs. MGC - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than MGC's 0.05% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFFC vs. MGC - Dividend Comparison
RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than MGC's 0.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MGC Vanguard Mega Cap ETF | 0.90% | 0.93% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.65% | 1.17% | 1.45% | 1.81% | 2.10% | 1.83% | 2.14% | 2.11% |
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF | 0.64% | 0.78% | 1.05% | 1.35% | 1.41% | 0.71% | 1.79% | 1.34% | 1.36% | 0.93% | 0.66% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, RFFC and MGC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
MGC has higher volatility (5.22%) compared to RFFC (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs MGC's -52.26%.
On 10-year performance, MGC leads with 16.33% vs 12.66% for RFFC. On fees, MGC is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, RFFC has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MGC has performed better with a 16.33% return vs 12.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MGC is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for RFFC.
MGC has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.64% for RFFC.
They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.05% for MGC.
RFFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.88), 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 RFFC and MGC
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