AOR vs. TUG

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

AOR (iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF) and TUG (STF Tactical Growth ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. AOR is passively managed, while TUG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, AOR returned 14.41%/yr vs 23.81%/yr for TUG. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AOR charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for TUG.

Performance

AOR vs. TUG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) and STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOR achieves a 7.96% return, which is significantly lower than TUG's 20.94% return.

AOR

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 3.07%
• YTD: 7.96%
• 6M: 8.80%
• 1Y: 20.12%
• 3Y*: 14.41%
• 5Y*: 7.20%
• 10Y*: 8.46%

TUG

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 11.22%
• YTD: 20.94%
• 6M: 19.79%
• 1Y: 41.80%
• 3Y*: 23.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AOR vs. TUG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
AOR iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF	7.96%	16.44%	10.68%	15.75%	-2.60%
TUG STF Tactical Growth ETF	20.94%	20.43%	19.37%	38.24%	-12.62%

Correlation

The correlation between AOR and TUG is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2022	0.78

The correlation between AOR and TUG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

AOR vs. TUG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AOR	TUG
Technology	27.8%	54.6%
Financial Services	16.2%	0.3%
Industrials	11.9%	3.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	12.0%
Communication Services	8.1%	15.4%
Healthcare	8.0%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	7.4%
Energy	4.3%	0.7%
Basic Materials	4.2%	1.1%
Utilities	2.7%	1.4%
Real Estate	2.4%	0.1%

Return for Risk

AOR vs. TUG — Risk / Return Rank

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

AOR

AOR Risk / Return Rank: 71
AOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
AOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
AOR Omega Ratio Rank: 75
AOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
AOR Martin Ratio Rank: 71

TUG

TUG Risk / Return Rank: 72
TUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
TUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
TUG Omega Ratio Rank: 73
TUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
TUG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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. TUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) and STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG). 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	TUG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.60	-0.19
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.43	3.39	+0.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.44	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	3.44	-0.36
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.48	13.14	+0.34
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. TUG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOR Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the TUG Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOR and TUG, 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	TUG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	2.60	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.80	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	1.13	-0.44

Drawdowns

AOR vs. TUG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOR drawdown since its inception was -24.44%, which is greater than TUG's maximum drawdown of -22.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOR and TUG.

Drawdown Indicators

	AOR	TUG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.44%	-22.27%	-2.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.64%	-12.31%	+5.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.77%	-22.27%	+12.50%
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	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.48%	-4.32%	+0.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.52%	3.22%	-1.70%

Volatility

AOR vs. TUG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) is 2.70%, while STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) has a volatility of 4.26%. This indicates that AOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TUG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AOR	TUG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.70%	4.26%	-1.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.81%	12.22%	-5.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.40%	16.15%	-7.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.55%	18.03%	-7.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.67%	18.03%	-7.36%

AOR vs. TUG - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than TUG's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

AOR vs. TUG - Dividend Comparison

AOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.46%, more than TUG's 1.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AOR iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF	2.46%	2.55%	2.66%	2.50%	2.12%	1.64%	1.89%	2.56%	2.49%	4.51%	2.16%	2.12%
TUG STF Tactical Growth ETF	1.42%	1.75%	4.97%	1.34%	1.14%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AOR and TUG in my portfolio?

AOR and TUG have a correlation of 0.84, 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 TUG?

TUG has higher volatility (4.26%) compared to AOR (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOR dropped -24.44% vs TUG's -22.27%.

Which ETF is better, AOR or TUG?

On 3-year performance, TUG leads with 23.81% vs 14.41% for AOR. On fees, AOR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AOR has been the lower-risk option at 2.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AOR or TUG?

Over the 3-year period, TUG has performed better with a 23.81% return vs 14.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AOR or TUG?

AOR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for TUG.

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

AOR has the higher dividend yield at 2.46%, compared with 1.42% for TUG.

What is the main difference between AOR and TUG?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and STF. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AOR and 0.65% for TUG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TUG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 2.41), 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.