PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AOM vs. RULE
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

AOM vs. RULE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

AOM vs. RULE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
AOM
iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF
-0.33%13.28%7.95%12.38%-14.54%0.23%
RULE
Adaptive Core ETF
5.55%4.60%7.59%6.29%-22.87%1.03%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOM achieves a -0.33% return, which is significantly lower than RULE's 5.55% return.


AOM

1D
0.06%
1M
-2.08%
YTD
-0.33%
6M
1.20%
1Y
11.09%
3Y*
9.14%
5Y*
4.30%
10Y*
5.87%

RULE

1D
-0.02%
1M
-2.86%
YTD
5.55%
6M
5.25%
1Y
16.28%
3Y*
8.28%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


AOM vs. RULE - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOM has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than RULE's 1.10% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

AOM vs. RULE — Risk / Return Rank

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

AOM
AOM Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
AOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
AOM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
AOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
AOM Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

RULE
RULE Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
RULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
RULE Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
RULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
RULE Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AOM vs. RULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). 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.


AOMRULEDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.35

0.84

+0.51

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.96

1.25

+0.71

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.17

+0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.17

1.34

+0.83

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.62

5.18

+3.44

AOM vs. RULE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is higher than the RULE Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOM and RULE, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AOMRULEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.35

0.84

+0.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

-0.03

+0.69

Correlation

The correlation between AOM and RULE is 0.64, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Dividends

AOM vs. RULE - Dividend Comparison

AOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.14%, while RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AOM
iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF
3.14%2.98%3.10%2.79%2.27%1.56%2.02%2.66%2.53%3.31%2.14%1.98%
RULE
Adaptive Core ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%2.01%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

AOM vs. RULE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOM drawdown since its inception was -19.96%, smaller than the maximum RULE drawdown of -30.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOM and RULE.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


AOMRULEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.96%

-30.48%

+10.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.11%

-12.65%

+7.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-19.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.23%

-7.17%

+3.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.72%

-15.50%

+12.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.35%

3.27%

-1.92%

Volatility

AOM vs. RULE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) is 3.26%, while Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a volatility of 8.16%. This indicates that AOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RULE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


AOMRULEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.26%

8.16%

-4.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.88%

15.25%

-10.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.24%

19.39%

-11.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.09%

13.93%

-5.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.90%

13.93%

-6.03%