Screener
RFFC vs ACES
ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF vs ALPS Clean Energy ETF
Key differences
- RFFC costs 0.07% less per year.
- ACES is significantly larger than RFFC — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- RFFC follows a active selection strategy; ACES uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, RFFC has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| RFFC | ACES | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.48% | 0.55% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $29M | $127M |
| Since | 2016 | 2018 |
| Dividend yield | 0.74% | 0.64% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +29.1% | +55.8% |
| CAGR 3Y | +21.9% | -2.1% |
| CAGR 5Y | +12.6% | -8.4% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.24 | 0.00 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.11% | 32.30% |
| Max drawdown | -36.26% | -79.05% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RFFC and ACES
Explore further