ALLW vs. RHRX
ALLW (SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF) and RHRX (RH Tactical Rotation ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ALLW returned 23.78% vs 40.94% for RHRX. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ALLW charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.36%/yr for RHRX.
Performance
ALLW vs. RHRX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ALLW achieves a 9.20% return, which is significantly lower than RHRX's 21.30% return.
ALLW
- 1D
- -0.76%
- 1M
- 0.91%
- YTD
- 9.20%
- 6M
- 8.47%
- 1Y
- 23.78%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RHRX
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 6.95%
- YTD
- 21.30%
- 6M
- 21.26%
- 1Y
- 40.94%
- 3Y*
- 22.87%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ALLW vs. RHRX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 9.20% | 15.04% |
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 21.30% | 21.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between ALLW and RHRX is 0.57, 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 | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2025 | 0.54 |
The correlation between ALLW and RHRX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.
ALLW vs. RHRX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ALLW
RHRX
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
ALLW
RHRX
Financial Services
ALLW
RHRX
Consumer Cyclical
ALLW
RHRX
Communication Services
ALLW
RHRX
Industrials
ALLW
RHRX
Healthcare
ALLW
RHRX
Consumer Defensive
ALLW
RHRX
Energy
ALLW
RHRX
Basic Materials
ALLW
RHRX
Utilities
ALLW
RHRX
Real Estate
ALLW
RHRX
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ALLW vs. RHRX — Risk / Return Rank
ALLW
RHRX
ALLW vs. RHRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) and RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX). 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.
| ALLW | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.54 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.30 | 6.02 | -2.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.01 | 23.61 | -9.60 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ALLW | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.27 | 3.12 | -0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.62 | 0.53 | +1.09 |
Drawdowns
ALLW vs. RHRX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ALLW drawdown since its inception was -8.78%, smaller than the maximum RHRX drawdown of -25.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ALLW and RHRX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ALLW | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.78% | -25.33% | +16.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.23% | -6.83% | -0.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.79% | -0.34% | -0.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.20% | -8.95% | +7.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.70% | 1.74% | -0.04% |
Volatility
ALLW vs. RHRX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) is 3.43%, while RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) has a volatility of 4.35%. This indicates that ALLW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RHRX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ALLW | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.43% | 4.35% | -0.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.71% | 9.73% | -1.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.52% | 13.19% | -2.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.54% | 19.03% | -6.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.54% | 19.03% | -6.49% |
ALLW vs. RHRX - Expense Ratio Comparison
ALLW has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than RHRX's 1.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
ALLW vs. RHRX - Dividend Comparison
ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.28%, while RHRX has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 4.28% | 4.67% |
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ALLW and RHRX have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RHRX has higher volatility (4.35%) compared to ALLW (3.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ALLW dropped -8.78% vs RHRX's -25.33%.
On 1-year performance, RHRX leads with 40.94% vs 23.78% for ALLW. On fees, ALLW is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, ALLW has been the lower-risk option at 3.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RHRX has performed better with a 40.94% return vs 23.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ALLW is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.36% for RHRX.
ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.28%, compared with 0.00% for RHRX.
They also come from different issuers: State Street and Adaptive. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for ALLW and 1.36% for RHRX.
RHRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 2.27), 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.
Find the right allocation for ALLW and RHRX
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer