AFLG vs EQTY
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF vs Kovitz Core Equity ETF
Which is better, AFLG or EQTY?
Each has led over a different period.
AFLG has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 3Y and the full window, EQTY over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.9%.
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 | AFLG | EQTY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55%Best | 0.99% |
| AUM | $906M | $1.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.71% | 0.02% |
| Holdings | 434 | 77 |
| YTD Return | +12.80%Best | +12.60% |
| 1Y Return | +13.66% | +16.37%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.31%Best | +19.06% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.36% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.0%Best | 12.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -17.5% | -17.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.9 years | $19,007Best | $18,669 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.7%Best | 42.9% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Kovitz Investment Group |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | Dec 28, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 12, 2022 to Nov 11, 2026 (3.9 years).
AFLG vs EQTY 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 3.9 years both funds cover.
AFLG vs EQTY Performance
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Kovitz Core Equity ETF (EQTY) is an ETF from Kovitz Investment Group. Over the past year AFLG returned +13.66% while EQTY returned +16.37%. Year to date, AFLG is up 12.80% versus a gain of 12.60% for EQTY.
Over three years, AFLG compounded at +21.31% per year against +19.06% for EQTY. Across the full 4-year window we track, AFLG has the edge at +17.90% annualized vs +17.36%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EQTY has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.8% compared with 12.0% for AFLG. 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 -17.5% for AFLG and -17.3% for EQTY. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFLG charges 0.55% per year while EQTY charges 0.99%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $99 annually, a gap of $44 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFLG currently yields 0.71% against 0.02% for EQTY.
Holdings Overlap
24.4% of AFLG's money is in holdings EQTY also owns. 38.9% of EQTY's money is in holdings AFLG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
14 positions in common, counted across the 216 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 37 in EQTY, against full books of 434 and 77.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 22 positions for EQTY that do not appear in our book for AFLG (54.4% of the fund), and 198 for AFLG that do not appear in EQTY (74.0%).
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 AFLG | Weight in EQTY | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.26% | 5.24% | 0.98% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 6.79% | 1.72% | 5.07% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.78% | 0.84% | 4.94% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.08% | 4.89% | 3.81% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.35% | 3.14% | 0.79% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 0.15% | 4.30% | 4.15% |
| ADIAnalog Devices | 0.36% | 3.97% | 3.61% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.99% | 3.22% | 2.23% |
| EOGEog Resources Inc | 0.86% | 2.06% | 1.20% |
| CRMSalesforce Inc Crm Us Equity | 0.45% | 2.16% | 1.71% |
38.9% of EQTY is already inside AFLG.
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, AFLG or EQTY?
AFLG has an expense ratio of 0.55% while EQTY charges 0.99%. AFLG is the cheaper option, by $44 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFLG or EQTY?
Over the past year AFLG returned +13.66% vs +16.37% for EQTY, so EQTY leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), AFLG annualized +17.90% vs +17.36% for EQTY. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFLG or EQTY?
EQTY has been the more volatile fund at 12.8% annualized versus 12.0% for AFLG. Worst drawdown: AFLG -17.5% vs EQTY -17.3%.
Should I hold both AFLG and EQTY?
AFLG and EQTY have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, 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 AFLG and EQTY?
38.9% of EQTY's money is in holdings AFLG also owns. 38.9% of EQTY's is in holdings AFLG also owns. They hold 14 positions in common, counted across the 216 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 37 in EQTY.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFLG or EQTY?
AFLG yields 0.71% while EQTY yields 0.02%, so AFLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is EQTY better than AFLG?
AFLG has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 3Y and the full window, EQTY over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.