RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO
RUD.TO (RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)) and FCUV.TO (Fidelity U.S. Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RUD.TO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by RBC, while FCUV.TO is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Canada U.S. Value Index. RUD.TO is actively managed, while FCUV.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RUD.TO returned 13.78%/yr vs 21.89%/yr for FCUV.TO. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RUD.TO charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FCUV.TO.
Performance
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RUD.TO achieves a 8.99% return, which is significantly lower than FCUV.TO's 15.14% return.
RUD.TO
- 1D
- -0.32%
- 1M
- 5.71%
- YTD
- 8.99%
- 6M
- 6.16%
- 1Y
- 22.08%
- 3Y*
- 17.06%
- 5Y*
- 13.78%
- 10Y*
- 13.02%
FCUV.TO
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 8.58%
- YTD
- 15.14%
- 6M
- 12.61%
- 1Y
- 34.52%
- 3Y*
- 26.57%
- 5Y*
- 21.89%
- 10Y*
- —
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) | 8.99% | 7.31% | 22.78% | 19.01% | -7.35% | 31.62% | 8.70% |
FCUV.TO Fidelity U.S. Value ETF | 15.14% | 14.80% | 35.81% | 19.98% | 2.58% | 38.55% | 10.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between RUD.TO and FCUV.TO is 0.77, 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 | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2020 | 0.72 |
The correlation between RUD.TO and FCUV.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Industrials
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
Energy
-
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Consumer Cyclical
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Financial Services
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Industrials
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Communication Services
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Consumer Defensive
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
-
Healthcare
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Energy
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
-
Utilities
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
Real Estate
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
-
Basic Materials
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
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
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO — Risk / Return Rank
RUD.TO
FCUV.TO
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) and Fidelity U.S. Value ETF (FCUV.TO). 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.
| RUD.TO | FCUV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.65 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.44 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.34 | 5.18 | -1.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.90 | 18.28 | -6.38 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RUD.TO | FCUV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.81 | 2.46 | -0.65 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | 1.45 | -0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.84 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.81 | 1.55 | -0.74 |
Drawdowns
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -29.89%, which is greater than FCUV.TO's maximum drawdown of -16.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUD.TO and FCUV.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RUD.TO | FCUV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.89% | -16.47% | -13.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.65% | -6.70% | +0.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.33% | -16.47% | -11.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.33% | -16.47% | -11.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.40% | -1.17% | +0.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -2.52% | -1.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.86% | 1.90% | -0.04% |
Volatility
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) is 2.59%, while Fidelity U.S. Value ETF (FCUV.TO) has a volatility of 5.31%. This indicates that RUD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCUV.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RUD.TO | FCUV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.59% | 5.31% | -2.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.27% | 10.95% | -1.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.31% | 14.13% | -1.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.38% | 15.14% | +0.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.53% | 14.72% | +0.81% |
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
RUD.TO has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than FCUV.TO's 0.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
RUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Dividend Comparison
RUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, more than FCUV.TO's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCUV.TO Fidelity U.S. Value ETF | 0.91% | 1.13% | 1.03% | 1.42% | 2.71% | 1.40% | 1.14% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) | 1.37% | 1.35% | 1.16% | 1.49% | 1.57% | 1.10% | 1.64% | 1.93% | 2.01% | 1.78% | 1.73% | 2.12% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RUD.TO and FCUV.TO have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FCUV.TO is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FCUV.TO is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for RUD.TO.
RUD.TO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FCUV.TO is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: RBC and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for RUD.TO and 0.38% for FCUV.TO.
Find the right allocation for RUD.TO and FCUV.TO
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