RFFC vs VOO

RFFC vs VOO

Which is better, RFFC or VOO?

Nearly the same fund. VOO costs less.

VOO has a lower expense ratio. RFFC led over 1Y, VOO over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. VOO is less concentrated, with 37.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.0%.

Lower Fees: VOOHigher Returns: splitLess Concentrated: VOO

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

MetricRFFCVOO
Expense Ratio0.48%0.03%Best
AUM$32M$997.4B
Dividend Yield0.61%1.04%
Holdings58509
YTD Return+14.28%Best+13.21%
1Y Return+21.36%Best+17.37%
3Y Return (annualized)+22.55%+22.66%Best
5Y Return (annualized)+12.37%+13.14%Best
Volatility (annualized)16.1%15.2%Best
Max Drawdown-36.5%-34.3%Best
$10,000 over 5 years$17,916$18,539Best
Top 10 Weight41.0%37.6%Best
Fund FamilyALPS AdvisorsVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionJun 6, 2016Sep 7, 2010

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 7, 2016 to Sep 24, 2026 (10.3 years).

RFFC vs VOO 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 10.3 years both funds cover.

RFFC vs VOO Performance

ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) is an ETF from ALPS Advisors and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year RFFC returned +21.36% while VOO returned +17.37%. Year to date, RFFC is up 14.28% versus a gain of 13.21% for VOO.

Over three years, RFFC compounded at +22.55% per year against +22.66% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +12.37% and +13.14% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +14.23% annualized vs +12.06%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

RFFC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.1% compared with 15.2% for VOO. 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 -36.5% for RFFC and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.

Fees and Cost Over Time

RFFC charges 0.48% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $48 vs $3 annually, a gap of $45 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RFFC currently yields 0.61% against 1.04% for VOO.

Holdings Overlap

RFFC already in VOO84.8%
VOO already in RFFC44.4%

84.8% of RFFC's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 44.4% of VOO's money is in holdings RFFC also owns.

Most of RFFC is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

50 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in RFFC and 494 in VOO, against full books of 58 and 509.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 437 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for RFFC (54.7% of the fund), and 4 for RFFC that do not appear in VOO (5.2%).

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

StockWeight in RFFCWeight in VOODifference
NVDANvidia Corp5.35%7.55%2.20%
AAPLApple, Inc5.18%7.05%1.87%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.81%5.36%0.45%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A4.67%3.24%1.43%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc3.69%4.13%0.44%
JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common3.91%0.96%2.95%
METAMeta Platforms Inc2.13%1.90%0.23%
JPMJpmorgan Chase2.50%1.46%1.04%
CATCaterpillar, Inc.2.44%0.58%1.86%
LRCXLrcx Uw Equity2.25%0.57%1.68%

84.8% of RFFC is already inside VOO.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

RFFCVOO

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, RFFC or VOO?

RFFC has an expense ratio of 0.48% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $45 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, RFFC or VOO?

Over the past year RFFC returned +21.36% vs +17.37% for VOO, so RFFC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), RFFC annualized +12.06% vs +14.23% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, RFFC or VOO?

RFFC has been the more volatile fund at 16.1% annualized versus 15.2% for VOO. Worst drawdown: RFFC -36.5% vs VOO -34.3%.

Should I hold both RFFC and VOO?

RFFC and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, 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 RFFC and VOO?

84.8% of RFFC's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 44.4% of VOO's is in holdings RFFC also owns. They hold 50 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in RFFC and 494 in VOO.

Which pays a higher dividend, RFFC or VOO?

RFFC yields 0.61% while VOO yields 1.04%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VOO better than RFFC?

VOO has a lower expense ratio. RFFC led over 1Y, VOO over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. VOO is less concentrated, with 37.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.