PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VUG vs. RFDA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VUG vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VUG achieves a 5.80% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 11.14% return.


VUG

1D
-3.62%
1M
0.03%
YTD
5.80%
6M
4.57%
1Y
23.98%
3Y*
24.49%
5Y*
14.33%
10Y*
17.81%

RFDA

1D
-1.34%
1M
2.49%
YTD
11.14%
6M
12.07%
1Y
29.80%
3Y*
18.88%
5Y*
13.11%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VUG vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VUG
Vanguard Growth ETF
5.80%19.40%32.69%46.83%-33.16%27.35%40.25%37.03%-3.32%27.72%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
11.14%16.42%20.12%16.98%-8.58%25.94%11.26%27.15%-9.27%19.86%

Correlation

The correlation between VUG and RFDA is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.77

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

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2016

0.81

The correlation between VUG and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

VUG vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VUG
RFDA

Technology

53.5%
19.9%

Communication Services

17.3%
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
7.0%

Healthcare

4.6%
8.8%

Financial Services

4.3%
14.7%

Industrials

3.6%
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

1.5%
7.6%

Real Estate

1.0%
5.0%

Utilities

0.9%
5.0%

Basic Materials

0.6%
1.8%

Energy

0.4%
12.5%

Technology

VUG
53.5%
RFDA
19.9%

Communication Services

VUG
17.3%
RFDA
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

VUG
12.2%
RFDA
7.0%

Healthcare

VUG
4.6%
RFDA
8.8%

Financial Services

VUG
4.3%
RFDA
14.7%

Industrials

VUG
3.6%
RFDA
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

VUG
1.5%
RFDA
7.6%

Real Estate

VUG
1.0%
RFDA
5.0%

Utilities

VUG
0.9%
RFDA
5.0%

Basic Materials

VUG
0.6%
RFDA
1.8%

Energy

VUG
0.4%
RFDA
12.5%

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

VUG vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

VUG
VUG Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
VUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
VUG Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
VUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
VUG Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

RFDA
RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

VUG vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) 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.


VUGRFDADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.47

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.46

5.49

-4.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.09

20.04

-14.95

VUG vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VUG Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is lower than the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VUG 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


VUGRFDADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.48

2.55

-1.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.84

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

0.79

-0.18

Drawdowns

VUG vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VUG drawdown since its inception was -50.68%, which is greater than RFDA's maximum drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VUG and RFDA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VUGRFDADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.68%

-34.60%

-16.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.53%

-5.45%

-11.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.85%

-19.35%

-3.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.61%

-19.35%

-16.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.61%

-34.60%

-1.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.83%

-1.34%

-3.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.09%

-3.74%

-3.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.72%

1.49%

+3.23%

Volatility

VUG vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) has a higher volatility of 5.17% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 3.11%. This indicates that VUG'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VUGRFDADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.17%

3.11%

+2.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.68%

8.65%

+4.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.26%

11.75%

+4.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.27%

15.74%

+6.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.47%

16.86%

+4.61%

VUG vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

VUG has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

VUG vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

VUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than RFDA's 1.78% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
1.78%1.89%2.23%2.68%3.57%1.44%1.62%1.87%2.44%1.90%0.98%0.00%
VUG
Vanguard Growth ETF
0.39%0.41%0.47%0.58%0.70%0.48%0.66%0.95%1.32%1.14%1.39%1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


VUG and RFDA have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

VUG has higher volatility (5.17%) compared to RFDA (3.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VUG dropped -50.68% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

On 5-year performance, VUG leads with 14.33% vs 13.11% for RFDA. On fees, VUG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 3.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, VUG has performed better with a 14.33% return vs 13.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VUG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 0.39% for VUG.

They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for VUG and 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.48), 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 VUG and RFDA

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