What is the difference between the expense ratios of DFAC and DFUS?

DFAC has an expense ratio of 0.17%, while DFUS has an expense ratio of 0.09%. This means DFUS costs 0.08 percentage points less annually than DFAC. Expense ratios are recurring annual fees that directly reduce net returns to investors. Lower costs can improve long-term growth potential, as fees compound over time. DFUS's lower fee is a notable advantage, though overall performance depends on fund management and market conditions. Always consider costs alongside other fund attributes.

What do ETF expense ratios mean for long-term investing?

Expense ratios represent the annual fee charged by a fund, expressed as a percentage of the assets invested. For instance, a 0.17% fee costs $17 annually on $10,000 invested, while a 0.09% fee costs $9 on the same amount. Over many years, small differences in fees can lead to significant differences in total returns due to the effect of compounding on these deductions. Therefore, a lower expense ratio generally allows more of your investment return to remain in your pocket.

What specific index or benchmark do DFAC and DFUS track?

Neither DFAC (Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF) nor DFUS (Dimensional US Equity Market ETF) lists a specific index that it tracks. Both funds are classified in the Large Blend category and are managed to invest in a broad range of US companies. While they do not have a disclosed index methodology, they are designed to capture the performance of the US equity market, albeit with potentially different implementation strategies or factor tilts.

How do DFAC and DFUS compare in terms of net assets and fund size?

DFAC is significantly larger in size, with net assets of $48.8 billion, compared to DFUS's net assets of $21.3 billion. Larger funds benefit from higher liquidity and trading volume, which can tighten bid-ask spreads for traders. However, very large asset bases may sometimes reduce a manager's flexibility to implement certain strategies, as noted in the drawbacks of DFAC. Despite the size difference, both funds are substantial players in the US large-cap market.

How much do the top ten holdings of DFAC and DFUS overlap?

DFAC and DFUS share eight of their top ten holdings: NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, META, GOOGL, MU, and AVGO. This indicates a high degree of similarity in their core US equity exposure. While the overlap is substantial, the weights assigned to these shared holdings differ. For example, NVDA makes up 5.60% of DFAC's portfolio but 7.17% of DFUS's. The remaining holdings and sector weights differ, with sector weights not being available for either fund.

What are the differences in dividend yield between the two funds?

DFAC currently has a dividend yield of 0.89%, while DFUS has a slightly lower yield of 0.83%. Both funds are focused on capital growth within the US market, resulting in relatively low dividend distributions compared to dedicated high-income funds. The difference in yield is marginal, reflecting similar holdings and income generation strategies. Investors focused on income should note that these yields are derived from the underlying companies and can fluctuate with market prices and declared dividends.

How should investors interpret the sector weights for these funds?

For both DFAC and DFUS, sector weights are listed as 'not available'. This limits the ability to perform a direct comparison of their exposure to specific industries such as technology, healthcare, or financials. Without this data, investors must infer broad sector exposure from the top holdings, which are heavily weighted toward technology companies like NVDA and AAPL. The lack of transparency on sector allocation is a notable drawback when attempting to gauge specific risk factors or style drift.

What historical context do the inception dates provide?

DFAC was launched on 4 October 2007, whereas DFUS has a longer history, starting on 25 September 2001. This means DFUS has been operating for over six years longer than DFAC. A longer track record can provide more historical data points for performance analysis, covering different market cycles such as the 2008 financial crisis or the 2001 dot-com crash. However, past performance does not guarantee future results, and both funds have operated through various market conditions.

Which fund is suitable for investors prioritising lower costs?

For investors whose primary decision criterion is minimising annual holding costs, DFUS may appear more attractive due to its lower expense ratio of 0.09% compared to DFAC's 0.17%. The lower cost structure allows for greater compounding of returns over long periods, assuming similar investment performance. However, cost is just one factor; investors must also consider the funds' investment objectives, trading history, and the specific characteristics of each fund's portfolio, as lower fees do not automatically equate to higher net performance.

What practical limitations should investors be aware of regarding these funds?

Both funds present practical limitations regarding transparency. Neither DFAC nor DFUS discloses sector weights or specific index methodologies. This makes precise portfolio analysis challenging, as investors cannot easily verify if the funds adhere to strict market-cap benchmarks or follow a systematic factor approach. Additionally, the DFAC pro's and cons list notes that its high asset base might limit flexibility, while DFUS faces criticism for lacking disclosed methodologies, forcing reliance solely on top holdings and expense data for evaluation.

How do investors assess market capitalisation exposure for these funds?

Both DFAC and DFUS are categorised as 'Large Blend' funds, implying they invest in established US companies with a mix of growth and value characteristics. This classification suggests exposure to market leaders and established corporations, as evidenced by top holdings like Apple and Microsoft. The 'Blend' nature indicates they are not strictly focused on pure growth or pure value, but rather a mixture. This provides diversified exposure to the US large-cap equity market, suitable for core portfolio holdings.

What are the risks associated with investing in these Large Blend ETFs?

Investing in DFAC or DFUS carries specific market risks. As equity funds, their value fluctuates based on the stock market, exposing investors to capital loss. Both funds hold significant positions in technology stocks (NVDA, AAPL, MSFT), which may lead to higher volatility compared to broader market indices. A concentration in top holdings increases specific company risk. If the US large-cap market declines, these funds will likely also decline, irrespective of their fee structures or inception dates.

DFAC vs DFUS

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) with ARK US Equity Market ETF (DFUS). This page reviews fees, holdings, dividends and how each fund tracks its market. DFAC has a 0.17% expense ratio, while DFUS costs 0.09%. Both invest in large blend equities. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

DFAC

Metric

DFUS

0.17%

Expense Ratio

0.09%

0.89%

Dividend Yield

0.83%

$48.75B

Net Assets

$21.30B

2,535

Holdings

2,245

Oct 4, 2007

Inception Date

Sep 25, 2001

–

Index Tracked

–

Large Blend

Fund Category

Large Blend

DFUS costs about $8.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	DFAC	DFUS
NVDANVIDIA Corporation	5.60%	7.17%
AAPLApple Inc.	5.54%	6.89%
MSFTMicrosoft Corporation	4.68%	5.25%
AMZNAmazon.com, Inc.	2.91%	3.49%
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.	2.10%	2.15%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.	1.62%	2.86%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.	1.29%	1.58%
AVGOBroadcom Inc.	1.27%	2.29%

Discover More Comparisons

DFAC vs DFAU

Compare DFAC and DFAU on fees, holdings and dividends. DFAC charges 0.17% while DFAU is 0.12%. Review asset sizes and top weights to assess tracking.

AVUS vs DFUS

Compare AVUS and DFUS, two US large blend ETFs. Review expense ratios of 0.15% and 0.09%, dividend yields, top holdings and tracking differences.

DFAU vs DFUS

Compare DFAU vs DFUS. Review fees of 0.12% and 0.09%, dividends, holdings like NVDA, and tracking. Note: sector weights are not available for either fund.

Investment Analysis

DFAC

Pros

Considerations

The fund lacks disclosed index methodology or sector weightings.
Net assets of $48.8 billion may reduce flexibility in some strategies.
A 0.17% expense ratio is modestly above the 0.09% DFUS level.

DFUS

Pros

Considerations

Higher expense ratio of 0.17% than the 0.09% DFUS alternative.
Net assets of $48.8 billion may constrain strategy execution and flexibility.
The fund does not provide sector weights or index methodology.

About DFAC and DFUS

DFAC (DFAC)

The Dimensional US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) is an exchange-traded fund designed to provide broad exposure to the US large-cap stock market. Launched in October 2007, it has grown significantly to hold net assets of approximately USD 48.75 billion. The fund follows a core equity strategy, focusing on large blend companies across the spectrum of value and growth. With 2,535 holdings, it offers diversification within the US equity landscape. Its expense ratio stands at 0.17%, which is generally considered low-cost for an actively managed ETF of its size, although passive trackers can sometimes offer lower fees. The fund provides an estimated dividend yield of 0.89%. As with any equity investment, the value of shares can go down as well as up, and investors may not get back the amount they originally invested. It aims to balance risk and return through its diversified portfolio structure.

DFUS (DFUS)

The Dimensional US Equity Market ETF (DFUS) is designed to provide broad exposure to the U.S. equity market. With an inception date of 25 September 2001 and a current net asset value of approximately USD 21.30 billion, this Large Blend fund holds over 2,200 companies, offering significant diversification. It features a low expense ratio of 0.09%, making it a cost-effective option for investors seeking general market access. While the fund has a reported dividend yield of 0.83%, it is important to note that its primary goal is long-term capital growth through equity exposure. Investors should remember that stock market values can rise and fall, and returns are not guaranteed. This ETF serves as a tool for those looking to understand how broad market indices function within a portfolio. As with any investment, it is essential to consider your own financial situation and risk tolerance before proceeding.

Buy DFAC or DFUS in Nemo

🆓

Zero Commission

Trade stocks, ETFs, and more with zero commission. Keep more of your returns.

🔒

Trusted & Regulated

Part of Exinity Group 2015, serving over a million customers globally.

💰

6% Interest on Cash

Earn 6% AER on uninvested cash with daily interest payments.

DFAC vs DFUS

Fund Snapshot