SMDV vs. AFSC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

SMDV (ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF) and AFSC (abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. SMDV is passively managed, while AFSC is actively managed. Over the past year, SMDV returned 20.83% vs 38.50% for AFSC. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SMDV charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for AFSC.

Performance

SMDV vs. AFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) 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, SMDV achieves a 13.61% return, which is significantly lower than AFSC's 26.03% return.

SMDV

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 3.61%
• YTD: 13.61%
• 6M: 11.16%
• 1Y: 20.83%
• 3Y*: 11.84%
• 5Y*: 5.77%
• 10Y*: 7.45%

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)

SMDV vs. AFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SMDV ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF	13.61%	-2.06%
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	26.03%	2.33%

Correlation

The correlation between SMDV and AFSC 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2025	0.78

The correlation between SMDV and AFSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SMDV vs. AFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMDV

SMDV Risk / Return Rank: 40
SMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
SMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
SMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 37
SMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
SMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

SMDV vs. AFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) 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.

	SMDV	AFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.33	2.04	-0.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	2.84	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.34	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.14	3.76	-1.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.49	14.29	-7.79

SMDV vs. AFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMDV Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is lower than the AFSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMDV 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

SMDV vs. AFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMDV drawdown since its inception was -34.12%, which is greater than AFSC's maximum drawdown of -21.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMDV and AFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMDV	AFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.12%	-21.93%	-12.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.79%	-10.29%	+0.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.23%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.23%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.60%	0.00%	-0.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.91%	-4.13%	-1.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	2.70%	+0.52%

Volatility

SMDV vs. AFSC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) is 3.98%, while abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) has a volatility of 5.19%. This indicates that SMDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMDV	AFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.98%	5.19%	-1.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.55%	14.53%	-3.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.81%	19.00%	-3.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.61%	22.52%	-3.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.74%	22.52%	-1.78%

SMDV vs. AFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMDV has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than AFSC's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMDV vs. AFSC - Dividend Comparison

SMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.32%, more than AFSC's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	0.06%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMDV ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF	2.32%	2.67%	2.68%	2.69%	2.51%	2.02%	2.13%	2.03%	1.97%	1.84%	1.35%	1.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMDV and AFSC in my portfolio?

SMDV and AFSC 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.

Which is riskier, SMDV or AFSC?

AFSC has higher volatility (5.19%) compared to SMDV (3.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMDV dropped -34.12% vs AFSC's -21.93%.

Which ETF is better, SMDV or AFSC?

On 1-year performance, AFSC leads with 38.50% vs 20.83% for SMDV. On fees, SMDV is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, SMDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMDV or AFSC?

Over the 1-year period, AFSC has performed better with a 38.50% return vs 20.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMDV or AFSC?

SMDV is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AFSC.

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

SMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.32%, compared with 0.06% for AFSC.

What is the main difference between SMDV and AFSC?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for SMDV and 0.65% for AFSC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.33), 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.