AOM vs. THRV
AOM (iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF) and THRV (Prospera Income ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. AOM is passively managed, while THRV is actively managed. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AOM charges 0.25%/yr vs 1.80%/yr for THRV.
Performance
AOM vs. THRV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AOM achieves a 5.00% return, which is significantly higher than THRV's 1.86% return.
AOM
- 1D
- -0.46%
- 1M
- 2.13%
- YTD
- 5.00%
- 6M
- 5.31%
- 1Y
- 14.51%
- 3Y*
- 10.87%
- 5Y*
- 4.80%
- 10Y*
- 6.22%
THRV
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 1.86%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AOM vs. THRV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 5.00% | 2.01% |
THRV Prospera Income ETF | 1.86% | 0.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between AOM and THRV is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025 | 0.71 |
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
AOM vs. THRV — Risk / Return Rank
AOM
THRV
AOM vs. THRV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) and Prospera Income ETF (THRV). 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.
| AOM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.85 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.45 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AOM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.79 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.69 | 1.04 | -0.35 |
Drawdowns
AOM vs. THRV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AOM drawdown since its inception was -19.96%, which is greater than THRV's maximum drawdown of -1.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOM and THRV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AOM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.96% | -1.50% | -18.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.96% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.46% | -0.51% | +0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.70% | -0.44% | -2.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.17% | — | — |
Volatility
AOM vs. THRV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AOM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.17% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.22% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.55% | 2.92% | +3.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.14% | 2.92% | +5.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.93% | 2.92% | +5.01% |
AOM vs. THRV - Expense Ratio Comparison
AOM has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than THRV's 1.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
AOM vs. THRV - Dividend Comparison
AOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%, less than THRV's 4.71% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 2.98% | 2.98% | 3.10% | 2.79% | 2.27% | 1.56% | 2.02% | 2.66% | 2.53% | 3.31% | 2.14% | 1.98% |
THRV Prospera Income ETF | 4.71% | 1.67% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AOM and THRV have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AOM is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AOM is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.80% for THRV.
THRV has the higher dividend yield at 4.71%, compared with 2.98% for AOM.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Prospera Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AOM and 1.80% for THRV.
Find the right allocation for AOM and THRV
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