RFFC vs. ONEQ
RFFC (ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF) and ONEQ (Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFFC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by SS&C, while ONEQ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Composite Index. RFFC is actively managed, while ONEQ is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFFC returned 12.76%/yr vs 19.90%/yr for ONEQ. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFFC charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for ONEQ.
Performance
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 11.06% return, which is significantly lower than ONEQ's 13.30% return. Over the past 10 years, RFFC has underperformed ONEQ with an annualized return of 12.76%, while ONEQ has yielded a comparatively higher 19.90% annualized return.
RFFC
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.46%
- YTD
- 11.06%
- 6M
- 10.92%
- 1Y
- 29.41%
- 3Y*
- 21.13%
- 5Y*
- 12.28%
- 10Y*
- 12.76%
ONEQ
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- -0.55%
- YTD
- 13.30%
- 6M
- 12.39%
- 1Y
- 35.91%
- 3Y*
- 25.75%
- 5Y*
- 14.06%
- 10Y*
- 19.90%
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF | 11.06% | 16.83% | 23.51% | 19.50% | -14.58% | 22.33% | 12.48% | 24.77% | -10.23% | 21.02% |
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF | 13.30% | 20.89% | 29.30% | 45.73% | -32.12% | 22.11% | 44.87% | 38.01% | -3.18% | 29.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFFC and ONEQ is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2016 | 0.87 |
The correlation between RFFC and ONEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFFC
ONEQ
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
RFFC
ONEQ
Industrials
RFFC
ONEQ
Healthcare
RFFC
ONEQ
Financial Services
RFFC
ONEQ
Consumer Cyclical
RFFC
ONEQ
Communication Services
RFFC
ONEQ
Energy
RFFC
ONEQ
Consumer Defensive
RFFC
ONEQ
Utilities
RFFC
ONEQ
Basic Materials
RFFC
ONEQ
Real Estate
RFFC
ONEQ
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. ONEQ — Risk / Return Rank
RFFC
ONEQ
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). 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 | ONEQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.36 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.19 | 2.86 | +0.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.52 | 10.89 | +3.63 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, smaller than the maximum ONEQ drawdown of -55.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and ONEQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFFC | ONEQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.26% | -55.09% | +18.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.25% | -12.64% | +3.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.45% | -24.09% | +5.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.29% | -35.23% | +12.94% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.26% | -35.23% | -1.03% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.72% | -3.29% | +2.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.00% | -7.94% | +2.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | 3.31% | -1.28% |
Volatility
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) is 4.14%, while Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) has a volatility of 7.25%. This indicates that RFFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ONEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFFC | ONEQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.14% | 7.25% | -3.11% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.85% | 13.53% | -3.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.44% | 17.28% | -4.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.33% | 22.33% | -6.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.01% | 21.81% | -3.80% |
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than ONEQ's 0.21% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFFC vs. ONEQ - Dividend Comparison
RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, less than ONEQ's 0.71% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF | 0.71% | 0.54% | 0.65% | 0.71% | 0.97% | 0.54% | 0.71% | 2.51% | 1.08% | 0.84% | 1.12% | 1.04% |
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% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFFC and ONEQ have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ONEQ has higher volatility (7.25%) compared to RFFC (4.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs ONEQ's -55.09%.
On 10-year performance, ONEQ leads with 19.90% vs 12.76% for RFFC. On fees, ONEQ is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, RFFC has been the lower-risk option at 4.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ONEQ has performed better with a 19.90% return vs 12.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ONEQ is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for RFFC.
ONEQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.71%, compared with 0.63% for RFFC.
RFFC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ONEQ is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.21% for ONEQ.
RFFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 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 RFFC and ONEQ
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