PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RFFC vs. THLV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RFFC vs. THLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF (THLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 13.17% return, which is significantly higher than THLV's 9.00% return.


RFFC

1D
1.00%
1M
0.70%
6M
7.66%
YTD
13.17%
1Y
25.29%
3Y*
20.49%
5Y*
11.88%
10Y*
12.66%
ALL TIME*
12.74%

THLV

1D
0.45%
1M
-2.43%
6M
3.24%
YTD
9.00%
1Y
15.47%
3Y*
10.54%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
9.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$84.66K$66.37K$69.76K
$345.27K$362.86K$370.75K

RFFC vs. THLV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
RFFC
ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF
13.17%16.83%23.51%19.50%-5.91%
THLV
THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF
9.00%10.50%9.52%5.88%1.22%

Correlation

The correlation between RFFC and THLV is 0.69, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.69

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2022

0.79

The correlation between RFFC and THLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFFC vs. THLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFFC
THLV

Technology

32.4%
17.5%

Industrials

13.4%
13.8%

Healthcare

12.5%
12.5%

Financial Services

11.0%
13.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
15.5%

Communication Services

8.0%
0.1%

Energy

4.4%
17.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
13.7%

Utilities

2.5%
14.0%

Basic Materials

2.3%
11.3%

Real Estate

2.2%
14.0%

Technology

RFFC
32.4%
THLV
17.5%

Industrials

RFFC
13.4%
THLV
13.8%

Healthcare

RFFC
12.5%
THLV
12.5%

Financial Services

RFFC
11.0%
THLV
13.8%

Consumer Cyclical

RFFC
8.8%
THLV
15.5%

Communication Services

RFFC
8.0%
THLV
0.1%

Energy

RFFC
4.4%
THLV
17.5%

Consumer Defensive

RFFC
2.6%
THLV
13.7%

Utilities

RFFC
2.5%
THLV
14.0%

Basic Materials

RFFC
2.3%
THLV
11.3%

Real Estate

RFFC
2.2%
THLV
14.0%

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

RFFC vs. THLV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RFFC
RFFC Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
RFFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFFC Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
RFFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFFC Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

THLV
THLV Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
THLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
THLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
THLV Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
THLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
THLV Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RFFC vs. THLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF (THLV). 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.


RFFCTHLVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.27

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.75

2.33

+0.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.26

6.90

+5.35

RFFC vs. THLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFFC Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the THLV Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFFC and THLV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

RFFC vs. THLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, which is greater than THLV's maximum drawdown of -13.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and THLV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFFCTHLVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.26%

-13.15%

-23.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.25%

-6.66%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.45%

-13.15%

-5.30%

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

0.00%

-2.72%

+2.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.96%

-3.66%

-1.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.07%

2.25%

-0.18%

Volatility

RFFC vs. THLV - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) has a higher volatility of 3.28% compared to THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF (THLV) at 2.85%. This indicates that RFFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than THLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFFCTHLVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.28%

2.85%

+0.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.86%

8.02%

+1.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.57%

10.32%

+2.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.33%

11.74%

+4.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.95%

11.74%

+6.21%

RFFC vs. THLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than THLV's 0.64% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFFC vs. THLV - Dividend Comparison

RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than THLV's 1.63% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
RFFC
ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF
0.62%0.78%1.05%1.35%1.41%0.71%1.79%1.34%1.36%0.93%0.66%
THLV
THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF
1.63%1.77%1.25%2.72%0.62%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RFFC and THLV have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RFFC has higher volatility (3.28%) compared to THLV (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs THLV's -13.15%.

On 3-year performance, RFFC leads with 20.49% vs 10.54% for THLV. On fees, RFFC is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, THLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, RFFC has performed better with a 20.49% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFFC is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for THLV.

THLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.62% for RFFC.

RFFC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while THLV is Equal Weight. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and THOR. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.64% for THLV.

RFFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.51), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RFFC and THLV

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