WOMN vs. RFDA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

WOMN (Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. WOMN is passively managed, while RFDA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, WOMN returned 8.60%/yr vs 13.17%/yr for RFDA. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WOMN charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.

Performance

WOMN vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) 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, WOMN achieves a 3.93% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 11.40% return.

WOMN

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: 2.66%
• YTD: 3.93%
• 6M: 4.39%
• 1Y: 11.53%
• 3Y*: 14.62%
• 5Y*: 8.60%
• 10Y*: —

RFDA

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: 4.27%
• YTD: 11.40%
• 6M: 12.25%
• 1Y: 29.49%
• 3Y*: 19.19%
• 5Y*: 13.17%
• 10Y*: —

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

WOMN vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
WOMN Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF	3.93%	8.62%	16.95%	28.19%	-20.61%	24.89%	34.16%	32.50%	-11.94%
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	11.40%	16.42%	20.12%	16.98%	-8.58%	25.94%	11.26%	27.15%	-16.10%

Correlation

The correlation between WOMN and RFDA is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2018	0.84

The correlation between WOMN and RFDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

WOMN vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WOMN	RFDA
Technology	30.3%	19.9%
Financial Services	14.3%	14.7%
Healthcare	11.0%	8.8%
Communication Services	9.8%	8.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.6%	7.0%
Consumer Defensive	6.9%	7.6%
Industrials	6.8%	8.9%
Energy	6.1%	12.5%
Utilities	3.0%	5.0%
Real Estate	2.0%	5.0%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

WOMN vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

WOMN

WOMN Risk / Return Rank: 30
WOMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
WOMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
WOMN Omega Ratio Rank: 28
WOMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
WOMN Martin Ratio Rank: 36

RFDA

RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 83
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 79
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

WOMN vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) 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.

	WOMN	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.07	2.55	-1.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	3.52	-1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.47	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.48	5.44	-3.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.46	19.87	-14.41
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WOMN vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WOMN Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is lower than the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WOMN 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WOMN	RFDA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.07	2.55	-1.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.53	0.84	-0.31
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.71	0.79	-0.08

Drawdowns

WOMN vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WOMN drawdown since its inception was -32.23%, smaller than the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WOMN and RFDA.

Drawdown Indicators

	WOMN	RFDA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.23%	-34.60%	+2.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.80%	-5.45%	-2.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.34%	-19.35%	+2.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.80%	-19.35%	-6.45%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.93%	-0.92%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.53%	-3.74%	-1.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	1.49%	+0.63%

Volatility

WOMN vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) have volatilities of 2.67% and 2.66%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WOMN	RFDA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.67%	2.66%	+0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.74%	8.47%	-0.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.82%	11.64%	-0.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.16%	15.73%	+0.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.70%	16.85%	+1.85%

WOMN vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

WOMN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

WOMN vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

WOMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.79%, less than RFDA's 1.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF	1.77%	1.89%	2.23%	2.68%	3.57%	1.44%	1.62%	1.87%	2.44%	1.90%	0.98%
WOMN Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF	0.79%	0.76%	1.08%	1.80%	5.59%	3.10%	6.15%	1.12%	0.90%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WOMN and RFDA in my portfolio?

WOMN and RFDA have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WOMN or RFDA?

WOMN has higher volatility (2.67%) compared to RFDA (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WOMN dropped -32.23% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

Which ETF is better, WOMN or RFDA?

On 5-year performance, RFDA leads with 13.17% vs 8.60% for WOMN. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WOMN or RFDA?

Over the 5-year period, RFDA has performed better with a 13.17% return vs 8.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WOMN or RFDA?

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for WOMN.

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

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.79% for WOMN.

What is the main difference between WOMN and RFDA?

They also come from different issuers: Impact Shares and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for WOMN and 0.52% for RFDA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.07), 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.