DFAC vs YLDE
Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF vs Franklin ClearBridge Enhanced Income ETF
Which is better, DFAC or YLDE?
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 0.91. DFAC is less concentrated, with 26.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 32.6%.
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 | DFAC | YLDE |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.17%Best | 0.48% |
| AUM | $48.6B | $173M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.89% | 7.02% |
| Holdings | 2,554 | 110 |
| YTD Return | +14.69%Best | +8.70% |
| 1Y Return | +19.83%Best | +11.67% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.42%Best | +17.22% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.31%Best | +11.05% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6% | 13.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -23.1% | -20.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,869Best | $16,889 |
| Top 10 Weight | 26.8%Best | 32.6% |
| Fund Family | Dimensional | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 4, 2007 | May 22, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 14, 2021 to Oct 12, 2026 (5.3 years).
DFAC vs YLDE 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.
DFAC vs YLDE Performance
Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) is an ETF from Dimensional and Franklin ClearBridge Enhanced Income ETF (YLDE) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year DFAC returned +19.83% while YLDE returned +11.67%. Year to date, DFAC is up 14.69% versus a gain of 8.70% for YLDE.
Over three years, DFAC compounded at +21.42% per year against +17.22% for YLDE; over five years the annualized figures are +12.31% and +11.05% 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 13.7% for YLDE. 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 -23.1% for DFAC and -20.2% for YLDE. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DFAC charges 0.17% per year while YLDE charges 0.48%. On a $10,000 position that is $17 vs $48 annually, a gap of $31 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DFAC currently yields 0.89% against 7.02% for YLDE.
Holdings Overlap
28.3% of DFAC's money is in holdings YLDE also owns. 82.5% of YLDE's money is in holdings DFAC also owns.
Most of YLDE is already inside DFAC. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
39 positions in common, counted across the 2,510 positions we hold weights for in DFAC and 48 in YLDE, against full books of 2,554 and 110.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 5 positions for YLDE that do not appear in our book for DFAC (9.3% of the fund), and 1,410 for DFAC that do not appear in YLDE (68.7%).
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 DFAC | Weight in YLDE | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.53% | 3.08% | 2.45% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.63% | 3.48% | 1.15% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.42% | 2.11% | 3.31% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 0.86% | 4.70% | 3.84% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 1.57% | 3.39% | 1.82% |
| WMBWilliams Cos. Inc. | 0.12% | 4.31% | 4.19% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.98% | 1.85% | 0.13% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.32% | 1.98% | 0.66% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 1.08% | 2.08% | 1.00% |
| APOAthene (Ath) / Apollo Global Management (Apo) | 0.10% | 2.90% | 2.80% |
82.5% of YLDE 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, DFAC or YLDE?
DFAC has an expense ratio of 0.17% while YLDE charges 0.48%. DFAC is the cheaper option, by $31 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DFAC or YLDE?
Over the past year DFAC returned +19.83% vs +11.67% for YLDE, so DFAC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DFAC or YLDE?
DFAC has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 13.7% for YLDE. Worst drawdown: DFAC -23.1% vs YLDE -20.2%.
Should I hold both DFAC and YLDE?
DFAC and YLDE have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 DFAC and YLDE?
82.5% of YLDE's money is in holdings DFAC also owns. 82.5% of YLDE's is in holdings DFAC also owns. They hold 39 positions in common, counted across the 2,510 positions we hold weights for in DFAC and 48 in YLDE.
Which pays a higher dividend, DFAC or YLDE?
DFAC yields 0.89% while YLDE yields 7.02%, so YLDE currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is YLDE better than DFAC?
DFAC has a lower expense ratio. DFAC led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. DFAC is less concentrated, with 26.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 32.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.