AFDM vs NTSI
First Trust Active Factor International ETF vs WisdomTree International Efficient Core Fund
Which is better, AFDM or NTSI?
Nearly the same fund. NTSI costs less.
NTSI has a lower expense ratio. AFDM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. AFDM is less concentrated, with 15.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 21.5%.
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 | AFDM | NTSI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.83% | 0.26%Best |
| AUM | $149M | $476M |
| Dividend Yield | 3.47% | 3.14% |
| Holdings | 178 | 466 |
| YTD Return | +11.55%Best | +4.28% |
| 1Y Return | +20.58%Best | +9.28% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.39%Best | +16.10% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.90%Best | +5.34% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 16.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.9% | -34.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,316Best | $12,971 |
| Top 10 Weight | 15.1%Best | 21.5% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | WisdomTree Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 14, 2016 | May 20, 2021 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: May 20, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5.4 years).
AFDM vs NTSI 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 5.4 years both funds cover.
AFDM vs NTSI Performance
First Trust Active Factor International ETF (AFDM) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and WisdomTree International Efficient Core Fund (NTSI) is an ETF from WisdomTree Investments. Over the past year AFDM returned +20.58% while NTSI returned +9.28%. Year to date, AFDM is up 11.55% versus a gain of 4.28% for NTSI.
Over three years, AFDM compounded at +21.39% per year against +16.10% for NTSI; over five years the annualized figures are +8.90% and +5.34% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NTSI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.2% compared with 15.6% for AFDM. 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 -35.9% for AFDM and -34.0% for NTSI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFDM charges 0.83% per year while NTSI charges 0.26%. On a $10,000 position that is $83 vs $26 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFDM currently yields 3.47% against 3.14% for NTSI.
Holdings Overlap
32.3% of AFDM's money is in holdings NTSI also owns. 19.6% of NTSI's money is in holdings AFDM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
49 positions in common, counted across the 178 positions we hold weights for in AFDM and 443 in NTSI, against full books of 178 and 466.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 5 positions for NTSI that do not appear in our book for AFDM (11.5% of the fund), and 2 for AFDM that do not appear in NTSI (3.9%).
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 AFDM | Weight in NTSI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASML:ASASML Holding NV - Ordinary Shares | 2.20% | 3.48% | 1.28% |
| 6098:TKRecruit Holdings Co Ltd | 1.75% | 0.73% | 1.02% |
| HSBA:LNHsbc Holdings Plc | 0.75% | 1.72% | 0.97% |
| NOVN:SMNovartis Ag Ordinary Shares | 1.13% | 1.33% | 0.20% |
| BARC:LNBarclays Plc | 1.69% | 0.44% | 1.25% |
| BNP:PABnp Paribas Sa | 1.58% | 0.52% | 1.06% |
| RR:LNRolls-Royce Holdings PLC Ord Gbp0.20 | 1.13% | 0.75% | 0.38% |
| TTE:PATotalenergies Se Ordinary Shares | 0.88% | 0.96% | 0.08% |
| BHP:AUBHP Group Limited Ordinary Shares | 0.87% | 0.96% | 0.09% |
| UBSG:SMUbs Group Ag Ordinary Shares | 0.87% | 0.77% | 0.10% |
32.3% of AFDM is already inside NTSI.
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, AFDM or NTSI?
AFDM has an expense ratio of 0.83% while NTSI charges 0.26%. NTSI is the cheaper option, by $57 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFDM or NTSI?
Over the past year AFDM returned +20.58% vs +9.28% for NTSI, so AFDM leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFDM or NTSI?
NTSI has been the more volatile fund at 16.2% annualized versus 15.6% for AFDM. Worst drawdown: AFDM -35.9% vs NTSI -34.0%.
Should I hold both AFDM and NTSI?
AFDM and NTSI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, 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 AFDM and NTSI?
32.3% of AFDM's money is in holdings NTSI also owns. 19.6% of NTSI's is in holdings AFDM also owns. They hold 49 positions in common, counted across the 178 positions we hold weights for in AFDM and 443 in NTSI.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFDM or NTSI?
AFDM yields 3.47% while NTSI yields 3.14%, so AFDM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NTSI better than AFDM?
NTSI has a lower expense ratio. AFDM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. AFDM is less concentrated, with 15.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 21.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.