DFAS
Dimensional U.S. Small Cap ETF
SMB
Adj. R2
0.980
Rel. Sharpe
1.158
Mkt beta
1.00
AUM
US$13.4B
MER
0.26%
Valuation
106
ETF comparison
Verified factor-similar pair
DFAS vs JHSC
These two ETFs meet the same FF6 US comparison criteria: US-listed equity ETFs, the same USD model basis, at least one material non-market factor, and 100% overlap in statistically significant material factor exposure.
SMB
Similarity score
90
Verified similar
The score combines exposure-level distance, factor-vector shape, market-beta closeness, and a small backtested relative-Sharpe term.
Quick Read
- DFAS has the higher backtested relative Sharpe (1.158 vs 0.661).
- DFAS has the lower published fee (0.26% vs 0.46%).
- DFAS is cheaper on dividend valuation (106 vs 110, where 100 is each fund's historical median).
- DFAS has the stronger regression fit (adjusted R-squared 0.980 vs 0.964).
These are screening signals, not a complete review of portfolio construction, turnover, taxes, or trading quality.
JHSC
John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF
SMB
Adj. R2
0.964
Rel. Sharpe
0.661
Mkt beta
0.99
AUM
US$703M
MER
0.46%
Valuation
110
Factor Exposure Match
Blue bars compare raw factor beta magnitude. Green bars compare absolute t-stat strength. Dim bars indicate the t-stat is below 1.96.
SMB
diff +0.20
HML
diff -0.01
RMW
diff +0.06
CMA
diff +0.05
UMD
diff -0.01
Why This Pair Matches
Exposure level
90
Exposure shape
100
Mkt beta diff
0.01
Rel. Sharpe diff
0.497
This comparison focuses on measured factor exposure. It does not compare holdings methodology, turnover, tax handling, or issuer process. Backtested relative Sharpe is a secondary signal rather than a stand-alone forecast. See methodology.
Monthly updates
Get the next US ETF leaders update
Get one monthly email when the US leaders table refreshes, plus methodology and comparison-page updates.
Monthly leaders refresh
Download-access updates
Low-volume research notes
One monthly email when the data drop lands. This browser will remember you after signup.