RFFC vs. RSSY

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RFFC (ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF) and RSSY (Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RFFC returned 27.11% vs 39.57% for RSSY. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFFC charges 0.48%/yr vs 1.04%/yr for RSSY.

Performance

RFFC vs. RSSY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 10.13% return, which is significantly lower than RSSY's 29.90% 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%

RSSY

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: -0.68%
• YTD: 29.90%
• 6M: 28.17%
• 1Y: 39.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RFFC vs. RSSY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF	10.13%	16.83%	9.68%
RSSY Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF	29.90%	-3.52%	1.40%

Correlation

The correlation between RFFC and RSSY is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2024	0.58

The correlation between RFFC and RSSY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RFFC vs. RSSY — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFFC

RFFC Risk / Return Rank: 72
RFFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
RFFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
RFFC Omega Ratio Rank: 72
RFFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
RFFC Martin Ratio Rank: 76

RSSY

RSSY Risk / Return Rank: 90
RSSY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
RSSY Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
RSSY Omega Ratio Rank: 89
RSSY Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
RSSY Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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. RSSY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY). 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	RSSY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	2.96	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	3.95	-0.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.53	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.94	5.40	-2.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.37	18.16	-4.79

RFFC vs. RSSY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFFC Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the RSSY Sharpe Ratio of 2.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFFC and RSSY, 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. RSSY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, which is greater than RSSY's maximum drawdown of -29.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and RSSY.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFFC	RSSY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.26%	-29.57%	-6.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.25%	-7.36%	-1.89%
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	-1.55%	-2.56%	+1.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.00%	-7.21%	+2.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	2.18%	-0.15%

Volatility

RFFC vs. RSSY - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) has a higher volatility of 4.25% compared to Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY) at 3.48%. This indicates that RFFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSSY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFFC	RSSY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.25%	3.48%	+0.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.88%	9.73%	+0.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.45%	13.46%	-1.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.33%	18.24%	-1.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.01%	18.24%	-0.23%

RFFC vs. RSSY - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than RSSY's 1.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFFC vs. RSSY - Dividend Comparison

RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than RSSY's 1.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
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%
RSSY Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF	1.57%	2.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFFC and RSSY in my portfolio?

RFFC and RSSY have a correlation of 0.55, 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 RSSY?

RFFC has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to RSSY (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs RSSY's -29.57%.

Which ETF is better, RFFC or RSSY?

On 1-year performance, RSSY leads with 39.57% vs 27.11% for RFFC. On fees, RFFC is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, RSSY has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFFC or RSSY?

Over the 1-year period, RSSY has performed better with a 39.57% return vs 27.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFFC or RSSY?

RFFC is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for RSSY.

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

RSSY has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 0.64% for RFFC.

What is the main difference between RFFC and RSSY?

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 1.04% for RSSY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSSY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.96 vs 2.19), 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.