RFDA vs WBIF
ALPS Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF vs WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
Which is better, RFDA or WBIF?
RFDA has been ahead.
RFDA has a lower expense ratio. RFDA led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window.
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 | RFDA | WBIF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.52%Best | 1.65% |
| AUM | $77M | $23M |
| Dividend Yield | 2.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 77 | 152 |
| YTD Return | +14.73% | +14.87%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.68%Best | +15.37% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.07%Best | +10.35% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.87%Best | +4.01% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 12.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -34.8% | -20.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,319Best | $12,172 |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | WBI Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 6, 2016 | Aug 25, 2014 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 7, 2016 to Oct 14, 2026 (10.4 years).
RFDA vs WBIF 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 10.4 years both funds cover.
RFDA vs WBIF Performance
ALPS Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) is an ETF from ALPS Advisors and WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) is an ETF from WBI Investments. Over the past year RFDA returned +16.68% while WBIF returned +15.37%. Year to date, RFDA is up 14.73% versus a gain of 14.87% for WBIF.
Over three years, RFDA compounded at +20.07% per year against +10.35% for WBIF; over five years the annualized figures are +12.87% and +4.01% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, RFDA has the edge at +12.11% annualized vs +5.74%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RFDA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 12.5% for WBIF. 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 -34.8% for RFDA and -20.3% for WBIF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.74. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RFDA charges 0.52% per year while WBIF charges 1.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $52 vs $165 annually, a gap of $113 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RFDA currently yields 2.00% against 0.00% for WBIF.
Holdings Overlap
At least 3.1% of RFDA's money is in holdings WBIF also owns.
Stated as a floor: for WBIF, our book for it covers 83.6% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
RFDA and WBIF share little of their money.
2 positions in common, counted across the 75 positions we hold weights for in RFDA and 62 in WBIF, against full books of 77 and 152.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of RFDA and WBIF 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, RFDA or WBIF?
RFDA has an expense ratio of 0.52% while WBIF charges 1.65%. RFDA is the cheaper option, by $113 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, RFDA or WBIF?
Over the past year RFDA returned +16.68% vs +15.37% for WBIF, so RFDA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), RFDA annualized +12.11% vs +5.74% for WBIF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, RFDA or WBIF?
RFDA has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 12.5% for WBIF. Worst drawdown: RFDA -34.8% vs WBIF -20.3%.
Should I hold both RFDA and WBIF?
RFDA and WBIF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.74, 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 RFDA and WBIF?
At least 3.1% of RFDA's money is in holdings WBIF also owns. Our book for WBIF is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 2 positions in common, counted across the 75 positions we hold weights for in RFDA and 62 in WBIF.
Which pays a higher dividend, RFDA or WBIF?
RFDA yields 2.00% while WBIF yields 0.00%, so RFDA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is WBIF better than RFDA?
RFDA has a lower expense ratio. RFDA led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.