AOR vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AOR (iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AOR is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P Target Risk Growth Index, while CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, AOR returned 14.21%/yr vs 13.75%/yr for CLSM. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AOR charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

AOR vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOR achieves a 7.39% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 20.45% return.

AOR

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 2.99%
• YTD: 7.39%
• 6M: 7.88%
• 1Y: 19.21%
• 3Y*: 14.21%
• 5Y*: 6.94%
• 10Y*: 8.40%

CLSM

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 9.23%
• YTD: 20.45%
• 6M: 20.19%
• 1Y: 34.21%
• 3Y*: 13.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AOR vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
AOR iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF	7.39%	16.44%	10.68%	15.75%	-15.64%	2.79%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	20.45%	15.32%	1.87%	3.78%	-23.23%	9.10%

Correlation

The correlation between AOR and CLSM is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2021	0.71

The correlation between AOR and CLSM shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (all time) to 0.88 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AOR vs. CLSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AOR	CLSM
Technology	27.8%	51.8%
Financial Services	16.2%	0.1%
Industrials	11.9%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	4.4%
Communication Services	8.1%	5.5%
Healthcare	8.0%	1.4%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	34.8%
Energy	4.3%	0.2%
Basic Materials	4.2%	0.4%
Utilities	2.7%	0.5%
Real Estate	2.4%	0.0%

Return for Risk

AOR vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

AOR

AOR Risk / Return Rank: 67
AOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
AOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
AOR Omega Ratio Rank: 70
AOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
AOR Martin Ratio Rank: 67

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 82
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CLSM 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.

AOR vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). 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.

	AOR	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	2.71	-0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.27	3.58	-0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.50	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	4.04	-1.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.69	16.72	-4.02
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AOR vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOR Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOR and CLSM, 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

	AOR	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	2.71	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66	—	—
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	0.35	+0.34

Drawdowns

AOR vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOR drawdown since its inception was -24.44%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOR and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	AOR	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.44%	-27.77%	+3.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.64%	-8.50%	+1.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.77%	-14.60%	+4.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.53%	-0.38%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.48%	-16.49%	+13.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.52%	2.05%	-0.53%

Volatility

AOR vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) is 2.72%, while Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) has a volatility of 3.58%. This indicates that AOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AOR	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.72%	3.58%	-0.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.81%	10.54%	-3.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.42%	12.70%	-4.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.55%	12.47%	-1.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.67%	12.47%	-1.80%

AOR vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

AOR vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

AOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, more than CLSM's 0.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AOR iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF	2.47%	2.55%	2.66%	2.50%	2.12%	1.64%	1.89%	2.56%	2.49%	4.51%	2.16%	2.12%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.75%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AOR and CLSM in my portfolio?

AOR and CLSM have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AOR or CLSM?

CLSM has higher volatility (3.58%) compared to AOR (2.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOR dropped -24.44% vs CLSM's -27.77%.

Which ETF is better, AOR or CLSM?

On 3-year performance, AOR leads with 14.21% vs 13.75% for CLSM. On fees, AOR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AOR has been the lower-risk option at 2.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AOR or CLSM?

Over the 3-year period, AOR has performed better with a 14.21% return vs 13.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AOR or CLSM?

AOR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.82% for CLSM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AOR or CLSM?

AOR has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.75% for CLSM.

What is the main difference between AOR and CLSM?

AOR is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CLSM is Tactical Allocation. AOR tracks S&P Target Risk Growth Index, while CLSM tracks Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AOR and 0.82% for CLSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.29), 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.