AOA vs FDAT: Grades, Fees and Holdings Compared

iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF

AOAANYSE Arca

Tactical Advantage ETF

FDATDNYSE Arca

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

AOA −1.01pt a year

AOA0.15%FDAT1.16%

Avg volume · 30D

AOA 151.0×the volume

AOA135KFDAT891

3Y return · a year

AOA +8.4pt

AOA+18.6%FDAT+10.2%

AOA vs FDAT Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+10.1%AOA+2.4%FDAT

Expense ratio: AOA 0.15%, better; FDAT 1.16%
Fund size: AOA $3.32B; FDAT $36M
1Y total return: AOA +10.1%, better; FDAT +2.4%
Yield (12M): AOA 2.19%; FDAT 6.01%, better
Holdings: AOA 34240; FDAT 17
Avg volume (30D): AOA 135K sh, better; FDAT 891 sh
NAV per share: AOA $96.21; FDAT $21.90
52W range

ETF.net Grade

Pillar letters and Scores for AOA, FDAT, with each pillar’s weight
Pillar	AOA	FDAT
Cost30% weight	A93Higher	F6
Mission25% weight	A100Higher	A70
Risk15% weight	B55Higher	C50
Tradability15% weight	A96Higher	F12
Holdings10% weight	A81Higher	C44
Durability5% weight	A98Higher	D27

Rank among Multi-Asset Allocation funds

How we build Categories ›

Same Category. AOA and FDAT are both graded against the same 37 Multi-Asset Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Multi-Asset Allocation⁠

Category · 37 funds

See all 37 ›

AOA ranks 2nd and FDAT 32nd of 37 funds in the Multi-Asset Allocation Category.

Rank 1AUCBGState Street SPDR UC Investments 90/10 Endowment Strategy Index ETFScore 95
Rank 2AAOAiShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETFScore 88
Rank 3AIRTRiShares LifePath Retirement ETFScore 86
Rank 31DBAMOBrookstone Opportunities ETFScore 35
Rank 32DFDATTactical Advantage ETFScore 34
Rank 33DQVOYQ3 All-Season Active Rotation ETFScore 32

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

AOAAiShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF

FDATDTactical Advantage ETF

In short

AOA A whole portfolio in one ticker. Since 2008, AOA has held a fixed 80/20 mix of global stock and bond index funds, with its index rebalancing the split back to target twice a year. No spreadsheet required.

FDAT A fund-of-ETFs that treats cash as a real holding: when its model reads a downtrend, it trims US equity and high-yield bond ETFs and parks the difference. All-in cost is 1.16%.

Stated mandate

AOA The Fund seeks to follow an index of equity and fixed-income ETFs designed for an aggressive target-risk allocation. It offers a diversified portfolio emphasizing growth and relatively higher equity exposure.

FDAT The Fund seeks long-term capital appreciation while attempting to keep the volatility of its returns below that of equity markets generally.

Why people hold it

AOA One trade buys a handful of underlying iShares index funds spanning global stocks and bonds, with the 80/20 split set by index rule rather than a manager's judgment call.ishares.com spglobal.com
Costs 0.15% net of a waiver through November 30, 2026 (0.19% gross), below the median fee in its allocation category.
Live since November 2008 and now a multi-billion-dollar fund, it has run the same target-risk mandate through the financial crisis and everything after.ishares.com
Among the strongest implementations in a crowded field of allocation funds, and it pays out quarterly.

FDAT Cash is a position here, not a leftover. A forecast downtrend shifts assets out of equity and high-yield bond ETFs into cash and cash equivalents.sec.gov
Visible plumbing: it holds other US-listed equity and high-yield bond ETFs rather than a black box of derivatives, and it distributes quarterly.sec.gov
The mandate is written around volatility, not just gains: long-term capital appreciation while keeping return swings below equity markets generally.sec.gov

Worth knowing

AOA Eighty percent equity means it rides global stock swings closely. The 20% bond sleeve softens drawdowns rather than stopping them.spglobal.com
That 0.15% is net of a contractual waiver through November 30, 2026. The gross 0.19% is the figure that applies if the waiver is not renewed.
Cheaper one-ticket rivals now exist: UCBG at 0.06% and IRTR at 0.08%. IRTR also glides its risk down over time, while AOA's 80/20 stays put.

FDAT At 1.16% it sits above the allocation-fund median, and well above index-built peers like UCBG (0.06%) and IRTR (0.08%). That fee covers the ETFs it owns too.sec.gov
A small, thinly traded fund, so spreads and order size matter more than they do in the category's giants.
Moving to cash cuts both directions: less exposure in selloffs, less in rallies. The signal is proprietary, so the timing is not visible in advance.sec.gov

Full AOA profile⁠

Full FDAT profile⁠

AOA vs FDAT Holdings

How AOA and FDAT differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Shared holdings make up 0.0% of AOA and 0.0% of FDAT.

Level by level

Holdings0 in both0.0%
Sector11 Sectors61.0%
Countryby domicile73.7%

Sector

Sector weights in AOA and FDAT, widest gap first
Sector	More in AOAMore in FDAT	AOA	FDAT
Technology	FDAT +28.0 points	31.6%	59.6%
Financials	AOA +14.1 points	16.1%	2.0%
Utilities	FDAT +7.3 points	2.3%	9.6%
Health Care	AOA +5.9 points	8.5%	2.6%
Consumer Discretionary	AOA +4.8 points	8.3%	3.6%
Consumer Staples	AOA +3.8 points	4.5%	0.7%
Industrials	FDAT +3.8 points	11.0%	14.8%
Materials	AOA +3.6 points	3.9%	0.3%
Energy	AOA +3.3 points	4.1%	0.8%
Communication	AOA +1.9 points	7.5%	5.6%
Real Estate	AOA +1.7 points	2.1%	0.5%

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in AOA and FDAT, widest gap first
Country	More in AOAMore in FDAT	AOA	FDAT
United States	FDAT +23.4 points	69.4%	92.8%
Japan	AOA +5.6 points	6.0%	0.4%
Canada	AOA +3.2 points	3.4%	0.2%
China	AOA +2.3 points	2.4%	0.1%
United Kingdom	AOA +2.3 points	3.6%	1.3%
Ireland	FDAT +2.3 points	0.0%	2.3%
Germany	AOA +2.1 points	2.1%	0.0%
France	AOA +2.0 points	2.1%	0.1%
Other countries (11)	AOA +8.2 points	11.0%	2.8%

Outside the US: AOA 73% developed, 27% emerging.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

AOA17.3%
FDAT78.3%

Securities held

AOA34,149
FDAT16

Asset class

AOA: Multi-Asset
FDAT: Multi-Asset

Holdings

Only in AOA34,149
In both0
Only in FDAT16

Only in AOA

34,149 securities, 99.6% of AOA by weight

Apple3.50%
NVIDIA3.44%
Microsoft2.69%
Amazon.com Inc1.64%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing1.17%
Alphabet Class A1.14%
Broadcom Inc1.08%
Meta Platforms Class A0.94%
Alphabet Class C0.92%
Eli Lilly0.79%
Tesla Inc0.78%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B0.70%
Micron Technology0.69%
JPMorgan Chase & Co0.62%
Advanced Micro Devices0.57%
Exxonmobil Holdings Corp0.54%
Samsung Electronics Ltd0.52%
Visa Class A0.49%
Asml Holding0.48%
Johnson & Johnson0.46%
Sk Hynix0.38%
Walmart0.38%
AbbVie0.36%
Mastercard Class A0.36%
Chevron0.32%
Costco Wholesale Corp0.31%
Palantir Technologies Class A0.29%
Cisco Systems Inc0.29%
Roche Ps Par AG0.27%
Procter & Gamble0.26%
Merck & Co Inc0.26%
UnitedHealth Group0.25%
Coca-Cola0.25%
Shell0.24%
Novartis AG0.23%
Hsbc Holdings PLC0.23%
Home Depot0.23%
Intel Corporation0.23%
Philip Morris International0.23%
Bank of America0.23%
Astrazeneca PLC0.22%
Royal Bank of Canada0.22%
Ge Aerospace0.22%
Applied Material Inc0.22%
Lam Research0.21%
Palo Alto Networks0.21%
Nestle SA0.21%
Caterpillar Inc0.20%
Tencent Holdings0.20%
Texas Instrument0.19%

Only in FDAT

16 securities, 99.9% of FDAT by weight

First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/203117.00%
Vanguard Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF12.30%
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Value ETF12.18%
Vanguard Morningstar Growth ETF8.11%
State Street Industrial Select Sector SPDR ETF8.01%
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF4.29%
iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF4.13%
State Street Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF4.12%
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF4.06%
iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF4.05%
First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF3.97%
Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF3.66%
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ET3.64%
VanEck Semiconductor ETF3.56%
Defiance Quantum ETF3.50%
State Street Utilities Select Sector SPDR ETF3.37%

Weight gaps

AOA and FDAT share no securities.

All AOA holdings⁠All FDAT holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

AOA vs FDAT Cost

Overpaying FDAT vs AOA

$18,095

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

AOA 0.15%
$3,137
FDAT 1.16%
$21,232

Amount$10,000

Years30 years

Cost over time

AOA 0.15%
FDAT 1.16%
Overpaying

Year by year

Year	AOA	FDAT	Overpaying
10	$274	$2,032	$1,758
20	$1,071	$7,580	$6,509
30	$3,137	$21,232	$18,095

Expense ratio

0.15%AOA, cheaper
1.16%FDAT

AOA0.15%FDAT1.16%

0.06%1.36%

Middle half of Multi-Asset Allocation funds
Median 0.57%

AOA 3rd cheapest of 37 funds

FDAT 35th cheapest of 37 funds

AOA vs FDAT Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026

Yield (12M): AOA 2.19%; FDAT 6.01%, better
Payout (12M): AOA $2.11; FDAT $1.32
Last payment: AOA $0.30; FDAT $0.14
Ex-dividend: AOA Oct 2, 2026; FDAT Sep 24, 2026
Paid on: AOA Oct 7, 2026; FDAT Sep 25, 2026
Frequency: AOA Quarterly; FDAT Quarterly

Distribution history

Per share, 2017 to 2026, same scale for both

AOAQuarterly · 39 paymentsAll AOA payments⁠

FDATQuarterly · 7 paymentsAll FDAT payments⁠

AOA vs FDAT Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years: AOA 9.6%FDAT 8.5%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years: AOA 1.37, betterFDAT 0.66
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years: AOA −23.6%FDAT −8.1%since Apr 2023
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years: AOA 1.06FDAT 0.76; Market = 1

AOA and FDAT in the news

All news⁠

Category Review
The fund built to limit losses had the category's worst return
Sep 25, 2026AOA

Popular comparisons

AOAAvsUCBGA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF · State Street SPDR UC Investments 90/10 Endowment Strategy Index ETF
Expense ratio
0.15% · 0.06%
Category
FDATDvsUCBGA
Tactical Advantage ETF · State Street SPDR UC Investments 90/10 Endowment Strategy Index ETF
Expense ratio
1.16% · 0.06%
Category
AOAAvsIRTRA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF · iShares LifePath Retirement ETF
Expense ratio
0.15% · 0.08%
Category
FDATDvsIRTRA
Tactical Advantage ETF · iShares LifePath Retirement ETF
Expense ratio
1.16% · 0.08%
Category
AOAAvsINCEA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF · Franklin Income Equity Focus ETF
Expense ratio
0.15% · 0.29%
Category
FDATDvsINCEA
Tactical Advantage ETF · Franklin Income Equity Focus ETF
Expense ratio
1.16% · 0.29%
Category

AOA vs FDAT

In short

Stated mandate

Why people hold it

Worth knowing

How AOA and FDAT differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in AOA

Only in FDAT

Weight gaps

Cost over time

Year by year

Distribution history

Fall from peak · 5 years

Risk facts

The fund built to limit losses had the category's worst return

How AOA and FDAT differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in AOA

Only in FDAT

Weight gaps