ABFL vs. NRSH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ABFL (Abacus FCF Leaders ETF) and NRSH (Aztlan North America Nearshoring Stock Selection ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ABFL is actively managed, while NRSH is passively managed. Over the past year, ABFL returned 20.72% vs 58.80% for NRSH. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ABFL charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for NRSH.

Performance

ABFL vs. NRSH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and Aztlan North America Nearshoring Stock Selection ETF (NRSH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABFL achieves a 17.63% return, which is significantly lower than NRSH's 47.92% return.

ABFL

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 6.04%
• YTD: 17.63%
• 6M: 17.18%
• 1Y: 20.72%
• 3Y*: 19.01%
• 5Y*: 12.77%
• 10Y*: —

NRSH

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 13.93%
• YTD: 47.92%
• 6M: 46.01%
• 1Y: 58.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABFL vs. NRSH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	17.63%	8.07%	18.26%	4.98%
NRSH Aztlan North America Nearshoring Stock Selection ETF	47.92%	12.95%	-6.17%	8.65%

Correlation

The correlation between ABFL and NRSH is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2023	0.70

The correlation between ABFL and NRSH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

ABFL vs. NRSH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ABFL	NRSH
Technology	35.2%	35.5%
Industrials	20.9%	58.7%
Healthcare	12.5%	-
Energy	7.9%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	7.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	-
Basic Materials	4.3%	-
Communication Services	2.9%	-
Financial Services	2.8%	-
Real Estate	-	5.8%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ABFL vs. NRSH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ABFL

ABFL Risk / Return Rank: 45
ABFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
ABFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
ABFL Omega Ratio Rank: 36
ABFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ABFL Martin Ratio Rank: 55

NRSH

NRSH Risk / Return Rank: 76
NRSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
NRSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
NRSH Omega Ratio Rank: 66
NRSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
NRSH Martin Ratio Rank: 83

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ABFL vs. NRSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and Aztlan North America Nearshoring Stock Selection ETF (NRSH). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	ABFL	NRSH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	2.42	-1.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	3.11	-1.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.40	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	5.40	-2.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.41	16.86	-7.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ABFL vs. NRSH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABFL Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the NRSH Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABFL and NRSH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ABFL	NRSH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	2.42	-1.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	1.11	-0.32

Drawdowns

ABFL vs. NRSH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABFL drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, which is greater than NRSH's maximum drawdown of -24.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABFL and NRSH.

Drawdown Indicators

	ABFL	NRSH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.95%	-24.01%	-10.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.17%	-10.94%	+3.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.88%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.99%	-5.62%	+0.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.21%	3.50%	-1.29%

Volatility

ABFL vs. NRSH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) is 4.48%, while Aztlan North America Nearshoring Stock Selection ETF (NRSH) has a volatility of 9.21%. This indicates that ABFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NRSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ABFL	NRSH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.48%	9.21%	-4.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.70%	20.27%	-8.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.31%	24.44%	-9.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.09%	21.54%	-4.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.71%	21.54%	-2.83%

ABFL vs. NRSH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABFL has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than NRSH's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ABFL vs. NRSH - Dividend Comparison

ABFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, more than NRSH's 0.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	0.53%	0.62%	0.70%	0.94%	1.36%	9.63%	0.41%	0.72%	0.62%	0.40%
NRSH Aztlan North America Nearshoring Stock Selection ETF	0.28%	0.42%	0.90%	0.17%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ABFL and NRSH in my portfolio?

ABFL and NRSH have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ABFL or NRSH?

NRSH has higher volatility (9.21%) compared to ABFL (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABFL dropped -34.95% vs NRSH's -24.01%.

Which ETF is better, ABFL or NRSH?

On 1-year performance, NRSH leads with 58.80% vs 20.72% for ABFL. On fees, ABFL is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, ABFL has been the lower-risk option at 4.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ABFL or NRSH?

Over the 1-year period, NRSH has performed better with a 58.80% return vs 20.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ABFL or NRSH?

ABFL is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for NRSH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ABFL or NRSH?

ABFL has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.28% for NRSH.

What is the main difference between ABFL and NRSH?

They also come from different issuers: Abacus and Aztlan. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ABFL and 0.75% for NRSH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.36), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.