ACSV vs DFAT
American Century Small Cap Value Insights ETF vs Dimensional US Targeted Value ETF
Which is better, ACSV or DFAT?
Nearly the same fund. DFAT costs less.
DFAT has a lower expense ratio. ACSV led over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96.
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 | ACSV | DFAT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.28%Best |
| AUM | $24M | $30.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.08% | 1.40% |
| Holdings | 419 | 1,234 |
| YTD Return | +14.75%Best | +13.08% |
| 1Y Return | +18.36%Best | +18.14% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +16.01% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.45% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.8% | 13.3%Best |
| Fund Family | American Century ETFs | Dimensional |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Value | Small Cap Value |
| Inception | Oct 14, 2025 | Dec 11, 1998 |
Not shown on this pair: Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.
ACSV vs DFAT 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
ACSV vs DFAT Performance
American Century Small Cap Value Insights ETF (ACSV) is an ETF from American Century ETFs and Dimensional US Targeted Value ETF (DFAT) is an ETF from Dimensional. Over the past year ACSV returned +18.36% while DFAT returned +18.14%. Year to date, ACSV is up 14.75% versus a gain of 13.08% for DFAT.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACSV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.8% compared with 13.3% for DFAT. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
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
ACSV charges 0.49% per year while DFAT charges 0.28%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $28 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACSV currently yields 1.08% against 1.40% for DFAT.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 201 holdings in ACSV and 1,141 in DFAT, totalling 100.0% and 72.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 201 positions we hold weights for in ACSV and 1,141 in DFAT, against full books of 419 and 1,234.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ACSV and DFAT you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACSV or DFAT?
ACSV has an expense ratio of 0.49% while DFAT charges 0.28%. DFAT is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ACSV or DFAT?
Over the past year ACSV returned +18.36% vs +18.14% for DFAT, so ACSV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ACSV or DFAT?
ACSV has been the more volatile fund at 13.8% annualized versus 13.3% for DFAT.
Should I hold both ACSV and DFAT?
ACSV and DFAT 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.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACSV or DFAT?
ACSV yields 1.08% while DFAT yields 1.40%, so DFAT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is DFAT better than ACSV?
DFAT has a lower expense ratio. ACSV led over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.