AFK vs GVAL
VanEck Africa Index ETF vs Cambria Global Value ETF
Which is better, AFK or GVAL?
GVAL has been ahead.
GVAL has a lower expense ratio. GVAL led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GVAL is less concentrated, with 25.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.5%.
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 | AFK | GVAL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.76% | 0.66%Best |
| AUM | $97M | $604M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.00% | 2.48% |
| Holdings | 73 | 123 |
| YTD Return | -1.28% | +20.82%Best |
| 1Y Return | +7.58% | +34.94%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.79% | +29.49%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.09% | +14.36%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 23.4% | 21.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -43.2% | -42.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,439 | $19,560Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.5% | 25.7%Best |
| Fund Family | VanEck | Cambria Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Mid Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 10, 2008 | Mar 11, 2014 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 2, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (6.9 years).
AFK vs GVAL 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 6.9 years both funds cover.
AFK vs GVAL Performance
VanEck Africa Index ETF (AFK) is an ETF from VanEck and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) is an ETF from Cambria Investment Management. Over the past year AFK returned +7.58% while GVAL returned +34.94%. Year to date, AFK is down 1.28% versus a gain of 20.82% for GVAL.
Over three years, AFK compounded at +24.79% per year against +29.49% for GVAL; over five years the annualized figures are +6.09% and +14.36% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, GVAL has the edge at +11.90% annualized vs +6.85%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AFK has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.4% compared with 21.0% for GVAL. 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 -43.2% for AFK and -42.5% for GVAL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFK charges 0.76% per year while GVAL charges 0.66%. On a $10,000 position that is $76 vs $66 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFK currently yields 1.00% against 2.48% for GVAL.
Holdings Overlap
1.8% of AFK's money is in holdings GVAL also owns. 0.2% of GVAL's money is in holdings AFK also owns.
AFK and GVAL share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 71 positions we hold weights for in AFK and 115 in GVAL, against full books of 73 and 123.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for GVAL that do not appear in our book for AFK (3.4% of the fund), and 6 for AFK that do not appear in GVAL (5.3%).
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 AFK | Weight in GVAL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMSJ:ZAValterra Platinum Ltd | 1.75% | 0.17% | 1.58% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of AFK and GVAL 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, AFK or GVAL?
AFK has an expense ratio of 0.76% while GVAL charges 0.66%. GVAL is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFK or GVAL?
Over the past year AFK returned +7.58% vs +34.94% for GVAL, so GVAL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), AFK annualized +6.85% vs +11.90% for GVAL. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFK or GVAL?
AFK has been the more volatile fund at 23.4% annualized versus 21.0% for GVAL. Worst drawdown: AFK -43.2% vs GVAL -42.5%.
Should I hold both AFK and GVAL?
AFK and GVAL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AFK and GVAL?
1.8% of AFK's money is in holdings GVAL also owns. 0.2% of GVAL's is in holdings AFK also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 71 positions we hold weights for in AFK and 115 in GVAL.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFK or GVAL?
AFK yields 1.00% while GVAL yields 2.48%, so GVAL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is GVAL better than AFK?
GVAL has a lower expense ratio. GVAL led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GVAL is less concentrated, with 25.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.