What is the main difference in investment approach between these two ETFs?

DFAS follows a small blend strategy, targeting a broad range of US small-cap companies without strict value or growth filters. DFSV focuses specifically on small-value stocks, seeking companies that appear cheaper relative to fundamentals. Both are active ETFs by Dimensional. The key distinction lies in their exposure: DFAS offers general small-cap market participation, while DFSV tilts toward the value factor, potentially altering return profiles and risk characteristics.

Do these ETFs track a specific index, and how does that affect the comparison?

Neither DFAS nor DFSV tracks a specific index; this data is marked as 'not available'. Consequently, traditional index-tracking error analysis is irrelevant. Instead, investors should evaluate them as active strategies. The absence of a benchmark index means performance is driven by the managers' stock selection process rather than replication of a predefined list, making qualitative assessment of strategy more critical than simple benchmark comparison.

What does 'expense ratio' mean and why is it important for these funds?

The expense ratio is the annual fee charged by the fund to cover operating costs, deducted directly from assets. For DFAS, the ratio is 0.26%, while for DFSV it is 0.30%. Although the difference is 0.04 percentage points, this small gap compounds over time, reducing net returns. Understanding these fees helps investors evaluate the cost efficiency of each active strategy relative to its expected benefits.

How do the dividend yields compare between DFAS and DFSV?

DFAS provides a dividend yield of 1.00%, whereas DFSV offers a slightly higher yield of 1.38%. This difference may reflect the underlying holdings' cash return profiles, with value stocks often distributing more income. However, a higher yield does not necessarily equate to higher total return. Investors should consider yields in the context of the fund's overall strategy and income needs rather than in isolation.

What is the impact of the expense ratio difference on long-term returns?

DFAS has a 0.26% expense ratio compared to 0.30% for DFSV, a difference of 0.04 percentage points. Over long periods, even this small fee gap can compound, slightly lowering the net return for DFSV holders relative to DFAS, assuming gross performance is identical. This cost differential is a practical factor when choosing between strategies, as lower fees preserve more of the investor's capital, thereby potentially enhancing compounding effects over time.

What type of investing goal is each fund typically associated with?

DFAS is generally associated with investors seeking broad exposure to the US small-cap market through a blended strategy. DFSV caters to those specifically targeting the small-value factor, aiming to potentially capture excess returns from value stocks. Neither is inherently superior; the choice depends on whether an investor prefers general small-cap market participation or a focused tilt toward value-oriented companies based on their personal financial objectives.

How does the inception date difference between the two funds affect their track records?

DFAS was established in 1998, providing over two decades of operational history and performance data. In contrast, DFSV was launched in 2022, meaning it has a much shorter track record. This difference matters for investors relying on historical consistency and established management processes. While both are managed by Dimensional, DFAS offers a longer history for evaluating strategy performance across various market cycles compared to the newer DFSV.

How concentrated are the top holdings in these funds?

DFAS exhibits extreme diversification in its top holdings, with the largest position (APA) at just 0.29%. DFSV shows slightly higher concentration in its top positions, led by BWA at 0.74%. While DFSV's top holdings are larger weights than DFAS's, they remain relatively small in absolute terms. This suggests both funds hold a wide array of stocks, but DFAS's blend strategy results in an even more diluted single-stock impact.

What does the overlap in holdings tell us about the two funds?

The only shared holding in the top ten of both funds is BWA, present in DFAS at 0.26% and in DFSV at 0.74%. This limited overlap indicates that despite both targeting US small caps, their selection processes lead to significantly different portfolio compositions. DFAS reflects a broader market blend, while DFSV's specific value tilt results in a distinct set of top positions with generally higher individual weights than those in DFAS.

Is sector weight data available for these ETFs, and why does it matter?

Sector weights are marked as 'not available' for both DFAS and DFSV. This lack of disclosure makes it difficult for investors to assess industry diversification or concentration risks directly. Without sector data, comparing how each fund navigates economic cycles becomes challenging. Investors must rely on the strategy descriptions (blend vs value) and top holdings rather than a complete sector map when evaluating their portfolio fit and risk exposure.

How do liquidity metrics like net assets differ between the two funds?

DFAS holds $15.1 billion in net assets, significantly larger than DFSV's $8.2 billion. This larger asset base typically supports greater liquidity, meaning investors may find it easier to buy or sell shares without affecting the price as much. While both funds appear reasonably large, DFAS's higher net assets suggest a potentially more liquid trading environment compared to the relatively newer and smaller DFSV.

What should investors know about ETF dividends before comparing yields?

The listed yields (1.00% for DFAS and 1.38% for DFSV) are trailing estimates based on recent distributions and current prices. They are not guaranteed and fluctuate as underlying companies change dividends. ETF dividends are often reinvested or paid out, impacting compounding or income streams. When comparing, consider that a higher yield might reflect specific portfolio compositions rather than a superior strategy, and actual distributions may vary from the stated yield.

DFAS vs DFSV

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

Compare Dimensional US Small Cap ETF and Dimensional US Small Cap Value ETF. Explore fees, holdings, dividends and how each fund tracks its market. DFAS has a 0.26% expense ratio and $15.1 billion in assets, while DFSV has a 0.30% expense ratio and $8.2 billion in assets. DFAS yields 1.00% and DFSV yields 1.38%. This page helps you understand the differences between these two small cap strategies. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

DFAS

Metric

DFSV

0.26%

Expense Ratio

0.30%

1.00%

Dividend Yield

1.38%

$15.14B

Net Assets

$8.24B

2,068

Holdings

999

Dec 15, 1998

Inception Date

Feb 24, 2022

–

Index Tracked

–

Small Blend

Fund Category

Small Value

DFAS costs about $4.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	DFAS	DFSV
BWABorgWarner Inc.	0.26%	0.74%

Discover More Comparisons

AVUV vs DFSV

Compare AVUV and DFSV ETFs. Analyze expense ratios, holdings, dividends, tracking methods and fund scale to assess small-cap value strategies effectively.

DFAT vs DFSV

Compare DFAT and DFSV Dimensional US value ETFs. Review expense ratios of 0.28% and 0.30%, net assets, dividend yields, top holdings and index tracking.

Investment Analysis

DFAS

Pros

net assets of $15.1 billion provide excellent liquidity for this small blend fund
a lower 0.26 percent expense ratio reduces costs compared to peer small cap value funds
founded in 1998 it offers over two decades of operational history and track record

Considerations

a 1.00 percent dividend yield is modest for income-focused small cap investors seeking returns
top holding at 0.29 percent concentration is low but limits meaningful single stock impact
sector weights are not available which makes assessing current industry diversification difficult for investors

DFSV

Pros

a 1.38 percent dividend yield offers higher income than many other small cap value options
focusing on small value provides distinct potential excess returns versus broader market capitalisation strategies
top holding weight of 0.74 percent indicates slightly more concentrated positioning than the blend fund

Considerations

a 0.30 percent expense ratio is higher than the blend alternative and adds to annual costs
established in 2022 the ETF lacks the long operational history of its more seasoned peers
net assets of $8.2 billion are smaller than the blend fund which may affect liquidity

About DFAS and DFSV

DFAS (DFAS)

The Dimensional US Small Cap ETF (DFAS) offers investors a diversified exposure to smaller US companies. As a 'Small Blend' fund, it targets a mix of value and growth characteristics within the small-cap universe, rather than leaning heavily into one style. With over 2,000 holdings, it provides broad access to this sector, which historically has shown higher volatility but also potential for distinct return drivers compared to larger companies. The fund employs an active approach focused on factors like size and value, aiming for efficiency and cost-effectiveness with an expense ratio of 0.26%. Investors should remember that small-cap stocks can be sensitive to economic shifts and liquidity conditions. While DFAS has a long track record since 1998 and significant assets under management, its performance, like all investments, is subject to market risks and is not guaranteed.

DFSV (DFSV)

The Dimensional US Small Cap Value ETF (DFSV) is designed to provide investors with exposure to smaller US companies that exhibit value characteristics. As an exchange-traded fund, it aims to track the performance of a diversified portfolio containing 999 holdings, focusing on firms that may be undervalued relative to their fundamentals. With an expense ratio of 0.30% and net assets of USD 8.24 billion, the fund offers a structured approach to accessing the small-cap value segment of the US market. Investors might consider this ETF for potential diversification benefits and exposure to a specific market niche, though it is important to remember that returns are not guaranteed and values can rise and fall. The fund also offers a current dividend yield of 1.38%, contributing to total return potential alongside capital growth, subject to market conditions and investor suitability.

Buy DFAS or DFSV 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.

DFAS vs DFSV

Fund Snapshot

Discover More Comparisons

AVUV vs DFSV

DFAT vs DFSV

Investment Analysis

DFAS

Pros

Considerations

DFSV

Pros

Considerations

About DFAS and DFSV

Buy DFAS or DFSV in Nemo

Zero Commission

Trusted & Regulated

6% Interest on Cash

Frequently asked questions

What is the main difference in investment approach between these two ETFs?

Do these ETFs track a specific index, and how does that affect the comparison?

What does 'expense ratio' mean and why is it important for these funds?

How do the dividend yields compare between DFAS and DFSV?

What is the impact of the expense ratio difference on long-term returns?

What type of investing goal is each fund typically associated with?

How does the inception date difference between the two funds affect their track records?

How concentrated are the top holdings in these funds?

What does the overlap in holdings tell us about the two funds?

Is sector weight data available for these ETFs, and why does it matter?

How do liquidity metrics like net assets differ between the two funds?

What should investors know about ETF dividends before comparing yields?

Fund Snapshot

About DFAS and DFSV

Discover More Comparisons

AVUV vs DFSV

DFAT vs DFSV