VEGN vs. RFDA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

VEGN (US Vegan Climate ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. VEGN is passively managed, while RFDA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, VEGN returned 15.68%/yr vs 12.89%/yr for RFDA. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. VEGN charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.

Performance

VEGN vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in US Vegan Climate ETF (VEGN) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VEGN achieves a 29.79% return, which is significantly higher than RFDA's 10.77% return.

VEGN

• 1D: -3.40%
• 1M: 6.70%
• YTD: 29.79%
• 6M: 29.01%
• 1Y: 46.88%
• 3Y*: 28.58%
• 5Y*: 15.68%
• 10Y*: —

RFDA

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 10.77%
• 6M: 9.90%
• 1Y: 26.59%
• 3Y*: 18.80%
• 5Y*: 12.89%
• 10Y*: 13.39%

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

VEGN vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
VEGN US Vegan Climate ETF	29.79%	13.71%	25.42%	38.10%	-26.87%	26.01%	27.72%	9.45%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	10.77%	16.42%	20.12%	16.98%	-8.58%	25.94%	11.26%	8.74%

Correlation

The correlation between VEGN and RFDA is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2019	0.84

The correlation between VEGN and RFDA shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.84 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

VEGN vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VEGN	RFDA
Technology	63.0%	21.1%
Financial Services	13.3%	14.4%
Communication Services	9.1%	8.3%
Healthcare	4.8%	9.7%
Industrials	4.7%	8.6%
Real Estate	3.1%	4.9%
Consumer Cyclical	1.8%	7.4%
Basic Materials	0.1%	1.9%
Utilities	0.1%	4.8%
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	7.0%
Energy	-	11.7%

Return for Risk

VEGN vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

VEGN

VEGN Risk / Return Rank: 81
VEGN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
VEGN Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
VEGN Omega Ratio Rank: 80
VEGN Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
VEGN Martin Ratio Rank: 82

RFDA

RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 81
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

VEGN vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for US Vegan Climate ETF (VEGN) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). 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.

	VEGN	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	2.28	+0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.30	3.14	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.42	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.98	4.90	-0.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.55	17.52	-1.97

VEGN vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VEGN Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VEGN and RFDA, 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

VEGN vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VEGN drawdown since its inception was -34.14%, roughly equal to the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VEGN and RFDA.

Drawdown Indicators

	VEGN	RFDA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.14%	-34.60%	+0.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.85%	-5.45%	-6.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.91%	-19.35%	-1.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.40%	-19.35%	-14.05%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.40%	-1.67%	-1.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.55%	-3.73%	-3.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.02%	1.52%	+1.50%

Volatility

VEGN vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

US Vegan Climate ETF (VEGN) has a higher volatility of 9.97% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 3.29%. This indicates that VEGN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RFDA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VEGN	RFDA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.97%	3.29%	+6.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.75%	8.77%	+6.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.33%	11.72%	+6.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.63%	15.75%	+4.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.93%	16.87%	+6.06%

VEGN vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

VEGN has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

VEGN vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

VEGN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.50%, less than RFDA's 1.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	1.80%	1.89%	2.23%	2.68%	3.57%	1.44%	1.62%	1.87%	2.44%	1.90%	0.98%
VEGN US Vegan Climate ETF	0.50%	0.51%	0.51%	0.67%	0.81%	0.41%	0.71%	0.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VEGN and RFDA in my portfolio?

VEGN and RFDA have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VEGN or RFDA?

VEGN has higher volatility (9.97%) compared to RFDA (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VEGN dropped -34.14% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

Which ETF is better, VEGN or RFDA?

On 5-year performance, VEGN leads with 15.68% vs 12.89% for RFDA. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VEGN or RFDA?

Over the 5-year period, VEGN has performed better with a 15.68% return vs 12.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VEGN or RFDA?

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for VEGN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VEGN or RFDA?

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 0.50% for VEGN.

What is the main difference between VEGN and RFDA?

They also come from different issuers: Beyond Investing and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for VEGN and 0.52% for RFDA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VEGN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 2.28), 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.