AFSM vs RUSC
First Trust Active Factor Small Cap ETF vs Russell Investments US Small Cap Equity ETF
Which is better, AFSM or RUSC?
AFSM has been ahead.
RUSC has a lower expense ratio. AFSM led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. RUSC is less concentrated, with 5.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 8.4%.
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 | AFSM | RUSC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.64%Best |
| AUM | $130M | $81M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.52% | 0.33% |
| Holdings | 657 | 491 |
| YTD Return | +19.57%Best | +13.09% |
| 1Y Return | +23.10%Best | +17.59% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.42% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.06% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Tie | 15.3%Tie |
| Max Drawdown | -9.6%Best | -9.8% |
| $10,000 over 1.4 years | $13,529Best | $13,328 |
| Top 10 Weight | 8.4% | 5.2%Best |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Russell Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | May 13, 2025 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 14, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.4 years).
AFSM vs RUSC 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 1.4 years both funds cover.
AFSM vs RUSC Performance
First Trust Active Factor Small Cap ETF (AFSM) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Russell Investments US Small Cap Equity ETF (RUSC) is an ETF from Russell Investments. Over the past year AFSM returned +23.10% while RUSC returned +17.59%. Year to date, AFSM is up 19.57% versus a gain of 13.09% for RUSC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AFSM and RUSC have been equally volatile, both at 15.3% annualized.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -9.6% for AFSM and -9.8% for RUSC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFSM charges 0.75% per year while RUSC charges 0.64%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $64 annually, a gap of $11 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFSM currently yields 0.52% against 0.33% for RUSC.
Holdings Overlap
17.4% of AFSM's money is in holdings RUSC also owns. 13.0% of RUSC's money is in holdings AFSM also owns.
AFSM and RUSC share little of their money.
55 positions in common, counted across the 321 positions we hold weights for in AFSM and 489 in RUSC, against full books of 657 and 491.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 328 positions for RUSC that do not appear in our book for AFSM (65.5% of the fund), and 251 for AFSM that do not appear in RUSC (77.2%).
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 AFSM | Weight in RUSC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TNKTeekay Tankers Ltd Common Stock Temp Line | 0.84% | 0.25% | 0.59% |
| PTGXProtagonist Therapeutics Inc | 0.71% | 0.36% | 0.35% |
| UVEUniversal Insurance Holdings Inc | 0.55% | 0.44% | 0.11% |
| OSPNOnespan, Inc. | 0.60% | 0.35% | 0.25% |
| KFRCKforce, Inc. | 0.59% | 0.35% | 0.24% |
| VIAVViavi Solutions Inc | 0.72% | 0.18% | 0.54% |
| STNG:MHScorpio Tankers Inc. Common Stock | 0.66% | 0.23% | 0.43% |
| HRTGHeritage Insurance Holdings Inc | 0.72% | 0.15% | 0.57% |
| KRYSKrystal Biotech Inc | 0.58% | 0.25% | 0.33% |
| TGTXTg Therapeutics Inc | 0.52% | 0.30% | 0.22% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of AFSM and RUSC 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, AFSM or RUSC?
AFSM has an expense ratio of 0.75% while RUSC charges 0.64%. RUSC is the cheaper option, by $11 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFSM or RUSC?
Over the past year AFSM returned +23.10% vs +17.59% for RUSC, so AFSM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), AFSM annualized +24.10% vs +22.78% for RUSC. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFSM or RUSC?
AFSM and RUSC have been equally volatile, both at 15.3% annualized. Worst drawdown: AFSM -9.6% vs RUSC -9.8%.
Should I hold both AFSM and RUSC?
AFSM and RUSC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 AFSM and RUSC?
17.4% of AFSM's money is in holdings RUSC also owns. 13.0% of RUSC's is in holdings AFSM also owns. They hold 55 positions in common, counted across the 321 positions we hold weights for in AFSM and 489 in RUSC.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFSM or RUSC?
AFSM yields 0.52% while RUSC yields 0.33%, so AFSM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RUSC better than AFSM?
RUSC has a lower expense ratio. AFSM led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. RUSC is less concentrated, with 5.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 8.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.