AOD vs ETW
Abrdn Total Dynamic Dividend Fund vs Eaton Vance Tax-Managed Global Buy-Write Opportunities Fund
Quick Verdict
ETW has a lower expense ratio. AOD delivered stronger 1-year returns. ETW offers more diversification with 259 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AOD | ETW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.16% | 1.10% | |
| AUM | $1.0B | $936M | |
| Dividend Yield | 11.72% | 7.41% | |
| Holdings | 86 | 291 | |
| YTD Return | +19.25% | +11.26% | |
| 1Y Return | +34.02% | +19.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.41% | +16.49% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.45% | +6.15% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.9% | 16.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -88.1% | -72.8% | |
| Fund Family | Aberdeen | Eaton Vance | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | Jan 26, 2007 | Sep 30, 2005 |
AOD vs ETW Performance
Abrdn Total Dynamic Dividend Fund (AOD) is a ETF from Aberdeen and Eaton Vance Tax-Managed Global Buy-Write Opportunities Fund (ETW) is a ETF from Eaton Vance. Over the past year AOD returned +34.02% while ETW returned +19.31%. Year to date, AOD is up 19.25% versus a gain of 11.26% for ETW.
Over three years, AOD compounded at +23.41% per year against +16.49% for ETW; over five years the annualized figures are +11.45% and +6.15% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, ETW has the edge at -1.12% annualized vs -4.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AOD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.9% compared with 16.9% for ETW. 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 -88.1% for AOD and -72.8% for ETW. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AOD charges 1.16% per year while ETW charges 1.10%. On a $10,000 position that is $116 vs $110 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AOD currently yields 11.72% against 7.41% for ETW.
Holdings Overlap
AOD and ETW share 25 holdings out of 319 unique holdings combined, representing a 20.9% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AOD or ETW?
AOD has an expense ratio of 1.16% while ETW charges 1.10%. ETW is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $6 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AOD or ETW?
Over the past year AOD returned +34.02% vs +19.31% for ETW, so AOD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), AOD annualized -4.00% vs -1.12% for ETW. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AOD or ETW?
AOD has been the more volatile fund at 21.9% annualized versus 16.9% for ETW. Worst drawdown: AOD -88.1% vs ETW -72.8%.
Should I hold both AOD and ETW?
AOD and ETW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AOD and ETW?
AOD and ETW share 25 common holdings with a 20.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 319 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AOD or ETW?
AOD yields 11.72% while ETW yields 7.41%, so AOD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.