DYNF vs NULC
iShares US Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF vs Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF
Which is better, DYNF or NULC?
Nearly the same fund. NULC costs less.
NULC has a lower expense ratio. DYNF led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NULC is less concentrated, with 34.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 40.9%.
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 | DYNF | NULC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.26% | 0.21%Best |
| AUM | $42.9B | $76M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.81% | 0.88% |
| Holdings | 229 | 138 |
| YTD Return | +14.80% | +16.55%Best |
| 1Y Return | +19.33%Best | +19.21% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.88%Best | +20.99% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.33%Best | +10.62% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6%Best | 16.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -34.7%Best | -34.9% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $20,404Best | $16,564 |
| Top 10 Weight | 40.9% | 34.3%Best |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | Nuveen |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 19, 2019 | Jun 3, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (7.4 years).
DYNF vs NULC 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 7.4 years both funds cover.
DYNF vs NULC Performance
iShares US Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF (DYNF) is an ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) is an ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year DYNF returned +19.33% while NULC returned +19.21%. Year to date, DYNF is up 14.80% versus a gain of 16.55% for NULC.
Over three years, DYNF compounded at +25.88% per year against +20.99% for NULC; over five years the annualized figures are +15.33% and +10.62% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, DYNF has the edge at +16.46% annualized vs +15.19%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NULC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.7% compared with 16.6% for DYNF. 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 -34.7% for DYNF and -34.9% for NULC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DYNF charges 0.26% per year while NULC charges 0.21%. On a $10,000 position that is $26 vs $21 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DYNF currently yields 0.81% against 0.88% for NULC.
Holdings Overlap
43.6% of DYNF's money is in holdings NULC also owns. 77.8% of NULC's money is in holdings DYNF also owns.
Most of NULC is already inside DYNF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
74 positions in common, counted across the 259 positions we hold weights for in DYNF and 128 in NULC, against full books of 229 and 138.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 52 positions for NULC that do not appear in our book for DYNF (21.8% of the fund), and 157 for DYNF that do not appear in NULC (56.2%).
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 DYNF | Weight in NULC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.62% | 9.39% | 0.77% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.94% | 5.43% | 0.49% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.70% | 4.05% | 1.35% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.52% | 3.40% | 0.88% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.86% | 3.24% | 1.38% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 1.77% | 1.70% | 0.07% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.59% | 1.78% | 0.19% |
| CRMSalesforce Inc Crm Us Equity | 1.55% | 1.27% | 0.28% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 1.71% | 0.55% | 1.16% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.35% | 1.86% | 1.51% |
77.8% of NULC is already inside DYNF.
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, DYNF or NULC?
DYNF has an expense ratio of 0.26% while NULC charges 0.21%. NULC is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DYNF or NULC?
Over the past year DYNF returned +19.33% vs +19.21% for NULC, so DYNF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), DYNF annualized +16.46% vs +15.19% for NULC. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DYNF or NULC?
NULC has been the more volatile fund at 16.7% annualized versus 16.6% for DYNF. Worst drawdown: DYNF -34.7% vs NULC -34.9%.
Should I hold both DYNF and NULC?
DYNF and NULC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, 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 DYNF and NULC?
77.8% of NULC's money is in holdings DYNF also owns. 77.8% of NULC's is in holdings DYNF also owns. They hold 74 positions in common, counted across the 259 positions we hold weights for in DYNF and 128 in NULC.
Which pays a higher dividend, DYNF or NULC?
DYNF yields 0.81% while NULC yields 0.88%, so NULC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NULC better than DYNF?
NULC has a lower expense ratio. DYNF led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NULC is less concentrated, with 34.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 40.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.