RUD.TO vs. KNGC.TO
RUD.TO (RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)) and KNGC.TO (Brompton Canadian Cash Flow Kings ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. RUD.TO is actively managed, while KNGC.TO is passively managed. Over the past year, RUD.TO returned 22.08% vs 55.50% for KNGC.TO. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RUD.TO charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for KNGC.TO.
Performance
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.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 KNGC.TO's 18.75% 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%
KNGC.TO
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- 1.71%
- YTD
- 18.75%
- 6M
- 19.23%
- 1Y
- 55.50%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) | 8.99% | 7.31% | 2.71% |
KNGC.TO Brompton Canadian Cash Flow Kings ETF | 18.75% | 41.07% | 176,983.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between RUD.TO and KNGC.TO is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2024 | 0.16 |
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. KNGC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
RUD.TO
KNGC.TO
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.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 Brompton Canadian Cash Flow Kings ETF (KNGC.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 | KNGC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.92 | -0.59 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.34 | 14.41 | -11.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.90 | 52.56 | -40.66 |
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 | KNGC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.81 | 4.54 | -2.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | — | — |
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 | 0.04 | +0.77 |
Drawdowns
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -29.89%, which is greater than KNGC.TO's maximum drawdown of -20.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUD.TO and KNGC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RUD.TO | KNGC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.89% | -20.25% | -9.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.65% | -3.87% | -2.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.33% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.33% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.40% | -0.75% | +0.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -3.09% | -0.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.86% | 1.06% | +0.80% |
Volatility
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.TO - Volatility Comparison
RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.59% compared to Brompton Canadian Cash Flow Kings ETF (KNGC.TO) at 2.31%. This indicates that RUD.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KNGC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RUD.TO | KNGC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.59% | 2.31% | +0.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.27% | 9.01% | +0.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.31% | 12.30% | +0.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.38% | 123,156.10% | -123,140.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.53% | 123,156.10% | -123,140.57% |
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
RUD.TO has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than KNGC.TO's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
RUD.TO vs. KNGC.TO - Dividend Comparison
RUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than KNGC.TO's 1.62% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KNGC.TO Brompton Canadian Cash Flow Kings ETF | 1.62% | 1.69% | 0.73% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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 KNGC.TO have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, KNGC.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
KNGC.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for RUD.TO.
They also come from different issuers: RBC and Brompton. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for RUD.TO and 0.17% for KNGC.TO.
Find the right allocation for RUD.TO and KNGC.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