Screener
RFFC vs SDOG
ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF vs ALPS Sector Dividend Dogs ETF
Key differences
- SDOG costs 0.12% less per year.
- SDOG is significantly larger than RFFC — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- RFFC follows a active selection strategy; SDOG uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, RFFC has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| RFFC | SDOG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.48% | 0.36% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $29M | $1.4B |
| Since | 2016 | 2012 |
| Dividend yield | 0.74% | 3.42% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +29.1% | +26.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +21.9% | +16.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | +12.6% | +8.3% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.24 | 0.90 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.11% | 11.46% |
| Max drawdown | -36.26% | -43.56% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RFFC and SDOG
Explore further