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

Performance

RFFC vs. VTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI). 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 VTI's 12.18% return. Over the past 10 years, RFFC has underperformed VTI with an annualized return of 12.66%, while VTI has yielded a comparatively higher 14.66% annualized 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%

VTI

1D
1.53%
1M
1.38%
6M
9.81%
YTD
12.18%
1Y
23.70%
3Y*
20.38%
5Y*
12.06%
10Y*
14.66%
ALL TIME*
9.64%
*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
$1.08B$1.16B$1.24B

RFFC vs. VTI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RFFC
ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF
13.17%16.83%23.51%19.50%-14.58%22.33%12.48%24.77%-10.23%21.02%
VTI
Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
12.18%17.10%23.81%26.05%-19.52%25.68%21.08%30.67%-5.23%21.21%

Correlation

The correlation between RFFC and VTI is 0.94, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


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

0.94

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

0.96

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.96

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2016

0.94

The correlation between RFFC and VTI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFFC vs. VTI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFFC
VTI

Technology

32.4%
36.1%

Industrials

13.4%
10.2%

Healthcare

12.5%
9.7%

Financial Services

11.0%
11.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
9.4%

Communication Services

8.0%
9.1%

Energy

4.4%
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
4.3%

Utilities

2.5%
2.2%

Basic Materials

2.3%
1.9%

Real Estate

2.2%
2.3%

Technology

RFFC
32.4%
VTI
36.1%

Industrials

RFFC
13.4%
VTI
10.2%

Healthcare

RFFC
12.5%
VTI
9.7%

Financial Services

RFFC
11.0%
VTI
11.8%

Consumer Cyclical

RFFC
8.8%
VTI
9.4%

Communication Services

RFFC
8.0%
VTI
9.1%

Energy

RFFC
4.4%
VTI
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

RFFC
2.6%
VTI
4.3%

Utilities

RFFC
2.5%
VTI
2.2%

Basic Materials

RFFC
2.3%
VTI
1.9%

Real Estate

RFFC
2.2%
VTI
2.3%

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. VTI — 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

VTI
VTI Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
VTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
VTI Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
VTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
VTI Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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. VTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI). 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.


RFFCVTIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.32

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.75

2.67

+0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.26

11.50

+0.75

RFFC vs. VTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFFC Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the VTI Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFFC and VTI, 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. VTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, smaller than the maximum VTI drawdown of -55.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and VTI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFFCVTIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.26%

-55.45%

+19.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.25%

-8.92%

-0.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.45%

-19.30%

+0.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.29%

-25.36%

+3.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.26%

-35.00%

-1.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.96%

-7.98%

+3.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.07%

2.07%

0.00%

Volatility

RFFC vs. VTI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) is 3.28%, while Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) has a volatility of 3.78%. This indicates that RFFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFFCVTIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.28%

3.78%

-0.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.86%

10.33%

-0.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.57%

13.08%

-0.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.33%

17.53%

-1.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.95%

18.31%

-0.36%

RFFC vs. VTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than VTI's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFFC vs. VTI - Dividend Comparison

RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than VTI's 1.04% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%
VTI
Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
1.04%1.12%1.27%1.44%1.66%1.21%1.42%1.78%2.04%1.71%1.92%1.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, RFFC and VTI 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.

VTI has higher volatility (3.78%) compared to RFFC (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs VTI's -55.45%.

On 10-year performance, VTI leads with 14.66% vs 12.66% for RFFC. On fees, VTI is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, RFFC has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VTI has performed better with a 14.66% return vs 12.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VTI is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for RFFC.

VTI has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 0.62% for RFFC.

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.03% for VTI.

RFFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.82), 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 VTI

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