PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SIZE vs. FTDS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SIZE vs. FTDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and First Trust Dividend Strength ETF (FTDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIZE achieves a 9.07% return, which is significantly higher than FTDS's 6.54% return. Over the past 10 years, SIZE has outperformed FTDS with an annualized return of 11.76%, while FTDS has yielded a comparatively lower 10.75% annualized return.


SIZE

1D
-0.68%
1M
3.62%
YTD
9.07%
6M
8.29%
1Y
18.11%
3Y*
15.94%
5Y*
8.07%
10Y*
11.76%

FTDS

1D
-0.21%
1M
-2.16%
YTD
6.54%
6M
6.72%
1Y
18.40%
3Y*
16.04%
5Y*
6.32%
10Y*
10.75%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SIZE vs. FTDS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SIZE
iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF
9.07%10.51%14.37%17.78%-15.86%25.05%16.26%28.97%-6.59%18.76%
FTDS
First Trust Dividend Strength ETF
6.54%13.64%11.12%11.75%-13.54%24.79%14.16%24.29%-10.35%20.07%

Correlation

The correlation between SIZE and FTDS is 0.76, 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

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.82

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2013

0.70

The correlation between SIZE and FTDS shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (all time) to 0.84 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SIZE vs. FTDS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SIZE
FTDS

Technology

19.9%
9.4%

Industrials

16.1%
19.8%

Financial Services

13.5%
27.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.8%
3.4%

Healthcare

9.6%
9.4%

Real Estate

5.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.7%
1.9%

Utilities

5.5%

-

Energy

5.2%
20.2%

Basic Materials

4.8%
8.0%

Communication Services

4.1%

-

Technology

SIZE
19.9%
FTDS
9.4%

Industrials

SIZE
16.1%
FTDS
19.8%

Financial Services

SIZE
13.5%
FTDS
27.9%

Consumer Cyclical

SIZE
9.8%
FTDS
3.4%

Healthcare

SIZE
9.6%
FTDS
9.4%

Real Estate

SIZE
5.7%
FTDS

-

Consumer Defensive

SIZE
5.7%
FTDS
1.9%

Utilities

SIZE
5.5%
FTDS

-

Energy

SIZE
5.2%
FTDS
20.2%

Basic Materials

SIZE
4.8%
FTDS
8.0%

Communication Services

SIZE
4.1%
FTDS

-

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

SIZE vs. FTDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

SIZE
SIZE Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
SIZE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SIZE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
SIZE Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
SIZE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
SIZE Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

FTDS
FTDS Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
FTDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTDS Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
FTDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTDS Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SIZE vs. FTDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and First Trust Dividend Strength ETF (FTDS). 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.


SIZEFTDSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.25

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.28

2.81

-0.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.88

7.56

+1.31

SIZE vs. FTDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIZE Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the FTDS Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIZE and FTDS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SIZEFTDSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.43

1.44

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.36

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

0.54

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.68

0.32

+0.37

Drawdowns

SIZE vs. FTDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIZE drawdown since its inception was -39.15%, smaller than the maximum FTDS drawdown of -56.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIZE and FTDS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SIZEFTDSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.15%

-56.53%

+17.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.97%

-6.57%

-1.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.71%

-18.04%

-0.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.03%

-23.35%

-0.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.15%

-42.47%

+3.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.68%

-4.46%

+3.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.18%

-9.87%

+5.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.04%

2.44%

-0.40%

Volatility

SIZE vs. FTDS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) is 3.17%, while First Trust Dividend Strength ETF (FTDS) has a volatility of 3.48%. This indicates that SIZE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SIZEFTDSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.17%

3.48%

-0.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.54%

8.87%

+0.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.73%

12.92%

-0.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.39%

17.65%

-0.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.69%

20.14%

-1.45%

SIZE vs. FTDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIZE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FTDS's 0.70% expense ratio.


Dividends

SIZE vs. FTDS - Dividend Comparison

SIZE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than FTDS's 1.66% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FTDS
First Trust Dividend Strength ETF
1.66%1.59%2.05%2.15%2.31%0.72%0.99%1.13%1.14%0.79%1.24%0.95%
SIZE
iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF
1.42%1.50%1.53%1.42%1.59%1.19%1.43%1.35%2.43%1.58%1.88%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


SIZE and FTDS have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FTDS has higher volatility (3.48%) compared to SIZE (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIZE dropped -39.15% vs FTDS's -56.53%.

On 10-year performance, SIZE leads with 11.76% vs 10.75% for FTDS. On fees, SIZE is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SIZE has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SIZE has performed better with a 11.76% return vs 10.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SIZE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FTDS.

FTDS has the higher dividend yield at 1.66%, compared with 1.42% for SIZE.

SIZE tracks MSCI USA Low Size Index, while FTDS tracks Dividend Strength Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SIZE and 0.70% for FTDS.

FTDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 1.43), 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 SIZE and FTDS

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