RUSC vs. AFSC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RUSC (U.S. Small Cap Equity Active ETF) and AFSC (abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RUSC returned 43.83% vs 38.50% for AFSC. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RUSC charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for AFSC.

Performance

RUSC vs. AFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in U.S. Small Cap Equity Active ETF (RUSC) and abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUSC achieves a 23.06% return, which is significantly lower than AFSC's 26.03% return.

RUSC

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 5.41%
• YTD: 23.06%
• 6M: 20.35%
• 1Y: 43.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AFSC

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 8.13%
• YTD: 26.03%
• 6M: 20.70%
• 1Y: 38.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RUSC vs. AFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RUSC U.S. Small Cap Equity Active ETF	23.06%	16.87%
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	26.03%	9.00%

Correlation

The correlation between RUSC and AFSC is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025	0.92

The correlation between RUSC and AFSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RUSC vs. AFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUSC

RUSC Risk / Return Rank: 79
RUSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
RUSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
RUSC Omega Ratio Rank: 71
RUSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
RUSC Martin Ratio Rank: 85

AFSC

AFSC Risk / Return Rank: 67
AFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
AFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
AFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 56
AFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
AFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

RUSC vs. AFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for U.S. Small Cap Equity Active ETF (RUSC) and abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC). 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.

	RUSC	AFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	2.04	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	2.84	+0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.34	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.80	3.76	+1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.10	14.29	+2.81

RUSC vs. AFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUSC Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is comparable to the AFSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUSC and AFSC, 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

RUSC vs. AFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUSC drawdown since its inception was -9.18%, smaller than the maximum AFSC drawdown of -21.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUSC and AFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUSC	AFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.18%	-21.93%	+12.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.18%	-10.29%	+1.11%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.71%	-4.13%	+2.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.57%	2.70%	-0.13%

Volatility

RUSC vs. AFSC - Volatility Comparison

U.S. Small Cap Equity Active ETF (RUSC) has a higher volatility of 5.84% compared to abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) at 5.19%. This indicates that RUSC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RUSC	AFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.84%	5.19%	+0.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.63%	14.53%	-0.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.60%	19.00%	-0.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.34%	22.52%	-4.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.34%	22.52%	-4.18%

RUSC vs. AFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

RUSC has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is lower than AFSC's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

RUSC vs. AFSC - Dividend Comparison

RUSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%, more than AFSC's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	0.06%	0.08%
RUSC U.S. Small Cap Equity Active ETF	0.31%	0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RUSC and AFSC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, RUSC and AFSC 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.

Which is riskier, RUSC or AFSC?

RUSC has higher volatility (5.84%) compared to AFSC (5.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUSC dropped -9.18% vs AFSC's -21.93%.

Which ETF is better, RUSC or AFSC?

On 1-year performance, RUSC leads with 43.83% vs 38.50% for AFSC. On fees, RUSC is cheaper at 0.64% per year. On volatility, AFSC has been the lower-risk option at 5.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RUSC or AFSC?

Over the 1-year period, RUSC has performed better with a 43.83% return vs 38.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUSC or AFSC?

RUSC is cheaper with a 0.64% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AFSC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RUSC or AFSC?

RUSC has the higher dividend yield at 0.31%, compared with 0.06% for AFSC.

What is the main difference between RUSC and AFSC?

They also come from different issuers: Russell and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for RUSC and 0.65% for AFSC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RUSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 2.04), 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.