AGNCN vs. CEFS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AGNCN (AGNC Investment Corp.) is a stock, while CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) is Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. Over the past 5 years, AGNCN returned 9.29%/yr vs 13.85%/yr for CEFS. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AGNC Investment Corp. (AGNCN) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGNCN achieves a 4.08% return, which is significantly lower than CEFS's 13.75% return.

AGNCN

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: -0.23%
• YTD: 4.08%
• 6M: 5.51%
• 1Y: 10.34%
• 3Y*: 10.94%
• 5Y*: 9.29%
• 10Y*: —

CEFS

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 4.35%
• YTD: 13.75%
• 6M: 15.64%
• 1Y: 25.00%
• 3Y*: 22.04%
• 5Y*: 13.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AGNCN AGNC Investment Corp.	4.08%	7.77%	15.21%	9.13%	6.33%	7.91%	6.01%	9.80%	5.20%	6.32%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	13.75%	16.67%	23.48%	20.99%	-7.08%	17.86%	3.40%	28.41%	-9.97%	6.06%

Correlation

The correlation between AGNCN and CEFS is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.17
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 17, 2017	0.21

Return for Risk

AGNCN vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGNCN

AGNCN Risk / Return Rank: 89
AGNCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
AGNCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AGNCN Omega Ratio Rank: 89
AGNCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
AGNCN Martin Ratio Rank: 92

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 80
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CEFS 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.

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AGNC Investment Corp. (AGNCN) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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.

	AGNCN	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	2.53	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	3.71	-0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.48	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.89	4.43	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.01	17.26	-2.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGNCN Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the CEFS Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGNCN and CEFS, 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

	AGNCN	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	2.53	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98	1.06	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.39	0.79	-0.41

Drawdowns

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGNCN drawdown since its inception was -53.34%, which is greater than CEFS's maximum drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGNCN and CEFS.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGNCN	CEFS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.34%	-38.99%	-14.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.67%	-5.67%	+3.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.17%	-13.37%	+6.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.62%	-16.85%	+3.23%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.77%	-0.51%	-0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.24%	-3.67%	+1.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.69%	1.45%	-0.76%

Volatility

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AGNC Investment Corp. (AGNCN) is 1.05%, while Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) has a volatility of 3.37%. This indicates that AGNCN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGNCN	CEFS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.05%	3.37%	-2.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.21%	8.56%	-5.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.08%	9.95%	-4.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.51%	13.08%	-3.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.95%	15.33%	+7.62%

Dividends

AGNCN vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison

AGNCN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.28%, more than CEFS's 7.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AGNCN AGNC Investment Corp.	9.28%	9.60%	10.37%	10.57%	7.47%	6.81%	6.87%	6.74%	6.92%	2.70%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	7.10%	7.84%	8.79%	9.20%	11.32%	10.73%	8.61%	8.10%	10.43%	5.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGNCN and CEFS in my portfolio?

AGNCN and CEFS have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AGNCN or CEFS?

CEFS has higher volatility (3.37%) compared to AGNCN (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGNCN dropped -53.34% vs CEFS's -38.99%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.05), 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.