ASGM vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ASGM (Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. ASGM is actively managed, while CLSM is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ASGM charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

ASGM vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF (ASGM) 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, ASGM achieves a 21.11% return, which is significantly higher than CLSM's 18.94% return.

ASGM

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 1.72%
• YTD: 21.11%
• 6M: 21.56%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSM

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 1.70%
• YTD: 18.94%
• 6M: 17.85%
• 1Y: 32.91%
• 3Y*: 14.07%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ASGM vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ASGM Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF	21.11%	11.08%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	18.94%	7.03%

Correlation

The correlation between ASGM 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2025	0.88

Return for Risk

ASGM vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASGM

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 77
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
CLSM Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

ASGM vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF (ASGM) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ASGM	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.40	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.16	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.44	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.89	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	15.29	—

Drawdowns

ASGM vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASGM drawdown since its inception was -6.62%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASGM and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASGM	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.62%	-27.77%	+21.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-8.50%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.68%	-1.63%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.33%	-16.35%	+15.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.16%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ASGM	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.11%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.89%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	13.80%	+2.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.73%	12.68%	+4.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.73%	12.68%	+4.05%

ASGM vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASGM has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASGM vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

ASGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.73%, more than CLSM's 0.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ASGM Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF	3.73%	4.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.76%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASGM and CLSM in my portfolio?

ASGM 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 ETF is better, ASGM or CLSM?

On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASGM or CLSM?

CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for ASGM.

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

ASGM has the higher dividend yield at 3.73%, compared with 0.76% for CLSM.

What is the main difference between ASGM and CLSM?

They also come from different issuers: Virtus and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 0.86% for ASGM and 0.82% for CLSM.