AFLG vs FTCS
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF vs First Trust Capital Strength ETF
Which is better, AFLG or FTCS?
Each has led over a different period.
FTCS has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, FTCS over 1Y. FTCS is less concentrated, with 22.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.7%.
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 | FTCS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.53%Best |
| AUM | $906M | $7.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.71% | 1.12% |
| Holdings | 434 | 102 |
| YTD Return | +12.80% | +14.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.66% | +15.06%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.31%Best | +13.25% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.36%Best | +6.76% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -35.8% | -31.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,126Best | $13,869 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.7% | 22.7%Best |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | Jul 6, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 4, 2019 to Nov 11, 2026 (6.9 years).
AFLG vs FTCS 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 6.9 years both funds cover.
AFLG vs FTCS Performance
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and First Trust Capital Strength ETF (FTCS) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year AFLG returned +13.66% while FTCS returned +15.06%. Year to date, AFLG is up 12.80% versus a gain of 14.54% for FTCS.
Over three years, AFLG compounded at +21.31% per year against +13.25% for FTCS; over five years the annualized figures are +11.36% and +6.76% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, AFLG has the edge at +13.07% annualized vs +9.83%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AFLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.5% compared with 15.5% for FTCS. 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 -35.8% for AFLG and -31.9% for FTCS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFLG charges 0.55% per year while FTCS charges 0.53%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $53 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFLG currently yields 0.71% against 1.12% for FTCS.
Holdings Overlap
14.7% of AFLG's money is in holdings FTCS also owns. 38.7% of FTCS's money is in holdings AFLG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
19 positions in common, counted across the 216 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 50 in FTCS, against full books of 434 and 102.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 31 positions for FTCS that do not appear in our book for AFLG (61.2% of the fund), and 193 for AFLG that do not appear in FTCS (83.7%).
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 FTCS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple Inc | 6.79% | 2.04% | 4.75% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.08% | 2.17% | 1.09% |
| EOGEog Resources Inc | 0.86% | 2.19% | 1.33% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 0.58% | 2.21% | 1.63% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 0.42% | 2.30% | 1.88% |
| EXPDExpeditors International Of Washington Inc. | 0.50% | 2.13% | 1.63% |
| GILDGilead Sciences | 0.32% | 2.27% | 1.95% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.58% | 1.99% | 1.41% |
| CBChubb Limited Common Stock | 0.56% | 1.98% | 1.42% |
| RMDResmed Inc. | 0.19% | 2.35% | 2.16% |
38.7% of FTCS 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 FTCS?
AFLG has an expense ratio of 0.55% while FTCS charges 0.53%. FTCS is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFLG or FTCS?
Over the past year AFLG returned +13.66% vs +15.06% for FTCS, so FTCS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), AFLG annualized +13.07% vs +9.83% for FTCS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFLG or FTCS?
AFLG has been the more volatile fund at 16.5% annualized versus 15.5% for FTCS. Worst drawdown: AFLG -35.8% vs FTCS -31.9%.
Should I hold both AFLG and FTCS?
AFLG and FTCS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, 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 AFLG and FTCS?
38.7% of FTCS's money is in holdings AFLG also owns. 38.7% of FTCS's is in holdings AFLG also owns. They hold 19 positions in common, counted across the 216 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 50 in FTCS.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFLG or FTCS?
AFLG yields 0.71% while FTCS yields 1.12%, so FTCS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FTCS better than AFLG?
FTCS has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, FTCS over 1Y. FTCS is less concentrated, with 22.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.