ABFL vs AVUS
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF vs Avantis US Equity ETF
Which is better, ABFL or AVUS?
Nearly the same fund. AVUS costs less.
AVUS has a lower expense ratio. AVUS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. AVUS is less concentrated, with 29.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 35.0%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ABFL | AVUS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.15%Best |
| AUM | $473M | $14.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.60% | 0.94% |
| Holdings | 58 | 1,917 |
| YTD Return | +11.62% | +15.65%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.48% | +20.98%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.92% | +21.87%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.39% | +12.65%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.7%Best | 17.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.0%Best | -37.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,393 | $18,141Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 35.0% | 29.7%Best |
| Fund Family | FCF Advisors | Avantis Investors |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2016 | Sep 24, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 26, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (7 years).
ABFL vs AVUS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 7 years both funds cover.
ABFL vs AVUS Performance
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) is an ETF from FCF Advisors and Avantis US Equity ETF (AVUS) is an ETF from Avantis Investors. Over the past year ABFL returned +12.48% while AVUS returned +20.98%. Year to date, ABFL is up 11.62% versus a gain of 15.65% for AVUS.
Over three years, ABFL compounded at +15.92% per year against +21.87% for AVUS; over five years the annualized figures are +10.39% and +12.65% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, AVUS has the edge at +15.59% annualized vs +13.56%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AVUS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% compared with 16.7% for ABFL. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -35.0% for ABFL and -37.0% for AVUS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ABFL charges 0.49% per year while AVUS charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $15 annually, a gap of $34 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ABFL currently yields 0.60% against 0.94% for AVUS.
Holdings Overlap
83.7% of ABFL's money is in holdings AVUS also owns. 20.3% of AVUS's money is in holdings ABFL also owns.
Most of ABFL is already inside AVUS. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
42 positions in common, counted across the 54 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 1,309 in AVUS, against full books of 58 and 1,917.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 843 positions for AVUS that do not appear in our book for ABFL (73.9% of the fund), and 11 for ABFL that do not appear in AVUS (14.8%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in ABFL | Weight in AVUS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.55% | 5.63% | 0.08% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.30% | 5.54% | 0.24% |
| GEVGe Vernova, Inc. | 4.03% | 0.38% | 3.65% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.99% | 1.00% | 1.99% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 3.00% | 0.82% | 2.18% |
| GILDGilead Sciences | 2.90% | 0.44% | 2.46% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 2.98% | 0.35% | 2.63% |
| KLACKla-tencor | 2.70% | 0.42% | 2.28% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc. | 2.78% | 0.34% | 2.44% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 2.57% | 0.54% | 2.03% |
83.7% of ABFL is already inside AVUS.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ABFL or AVUS?
ABFL has an expense ratio of 0.49% while AVUS charges 0.15%. AVUS is the cheaper option, by $34 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ABFL or AVUS?
Over the past year ABFL returned +12.48% vs +20.98% for AVUS, so AVUS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), ABFL annualized +13.56% vs +15.59% for AVUS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ABFL or AVUS?
AVUS has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 16.7% for ABFL. Worst drawdown: ABFL -35.0% vs AVUS -37.0%.
Should I hold both ABFL and AVUS?
ABFL and AVUS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ABFL and AVUS?
83.7% of ABFL's money is in holdings AVUS also owns. 20.3% of AVUS's is in holdings ABFL also owns. They hold 42 positions in common, counted across the 54 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 1,309 in AVUS.
Which pays a higher dividend, ABFL or AVUS?
ABFL yields 0.60% while AVUS yields 0.94%, so AVUS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is AVUS better than ABFL?
AVUS has a lower expense ratio. AVUS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. AVUS is less concentrated, with 29.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 35.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.