ABFL vs DFAC
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF vs Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF
Which is better, ABFL or DFAC?
DFAC has been ahead.
DFAC has a lower expense ratio. DFAC led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. DFAC is less concentrated, with 26.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
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 | ABFL | DFAC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.17%Best |
| AUM | $534M | $48.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.54% | 0.89% |
| Holdings | 58 | 2,554 |
| YTD Return | +13.57% | +14.69%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.75% | +19.83%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.97% | +21.42%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.21% | +12.31%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9%Best | 15.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -22.0%Best | -23.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,011 | $17,869Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.3% | 26.8%Best |
| Fund Family | FCF Advisors | Dimensional |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2016 | Oct 4, 2007 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 14, 2021 to Oct 12, 2026 (5.3 years).
ABFL vs DFAC 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 5.3 years both funds cover.
ABFL vs DFAC Performance
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) is an ETF from FCF Advisors and Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) is an ETF from Dimensional. Over the past year ABFL returned +14.75% while DFAC returned +19.83%. Year to date, ABFL is up 13.57% versus a gain of 14.69% for DFAC.
Over three years, ABFL compounded at +16.97% per year against +21.42% for DFAC; over five years the annualized figures are +11.21% and +12.31% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
DFAC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% compared with 14.9% for ABFL. 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 -22.0% for ABFL and -23.1% for DFAC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ABFL charges 0.49% per year while DFAC charges 0.17%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $17 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ABFL currently yields 0.54% against 0.89% for DFAC.
Holdings Overlap
95.1% of ABFL's money is in holdings DFAC also owns. 19.4% of DFAC's money is in holdings ABFL also owns.
Most of ABFL is already inside DFAC. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
53 positions in common, counted across the 56 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 2,510 in DFAC, against full books of 58 and 2,554.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,398 positions for DFAC that do not appear in our book for ABFL (77.7% of the fund), and 2 for ABFL that do not appear in DFAC (3.3%).
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 ABFL | Weight in DFAC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.52% | 5.42% | 0.10% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.04% | 5.53% | 0.49% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.48% | 1.32% | 2.16% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.93% | 1.00% | 1.93% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 2.94% | 0.43% | 2.51% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 2.65% | 0.52% | 2.13% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.38% | 0.70% | 1.68% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 2.85% | 0.20% | 2.65% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 2.64% | 0.20% | 2.44% |
| KLACKla Corp | 2.40% | 0.26% | 2.14% |
95.1% of ABFL is already inside DFAC.
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, ABFL or DFAC?
ABFL has an expense ratio of 0.49% while DFAC charges 0.17%. DFAC is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ABFL or DFAC?
Over the past year ABFL returned +14.75% vs +19.83% for DFAC, so DFAC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ABFL or DFAC?
DFAC has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 14.9% for ABFL. Worst drawdown: ABFL -22.0% vs DFAC -23.1%.
Should I hold both ABFL and DFAC?
ABFL and DFAC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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 ABFL and DFAC?
95.1% of ABFL's money is in holdings DFAC also owns. 19.4% of DFAC's is in holdings ABFL also owns. They hold 53 positions in common, counted across the 56 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 2,510 in DFAC.
Which pays a higher dividend, ABFL or DFAC?
ABFL yields 0.54% while DFAC yields 0.89%, so DFAC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is DFAC better than ABFL?
DFAC has a lower expense ratio. DFAC led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. DFAC is less concentrated, with 26.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.