BBB vs. CLSM

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

BBB (CYBER HORNET S&P 500 and Bitcoin 75/25 Strategy ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BBB is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P 500 and S&P Bitcoin 75/25 Blend Index, while CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BBB returned -0.63% vs 25.23% for CLSM. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BBB charges 0.98%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

BBB vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CYBER HORNET S&P 500 and Bitcoin 75/25 Strategy ETF (BBB) 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, BBB achieves a -0.51% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 15.94% return.

BBB

• 1D: -1.27%
• 1M: 0.28%
• 6M: -2.86%
• YTD: -0.51%
• 1Y: -0.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSM

• 1D: -1.38%
• 1M: -1.54%
• 6M: 13.12%
• YTD: 15.94%
• 1Y: 25.23%
• 3Y*: 11.76%
• 5Y*: 3.43%
• 10Y*: —

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

BBB vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BBB CYBER HORNET S&P 500 and Bitcoin 75/25 Strategy ETF	-0.51%	9.73%	38.82%	-0.86%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	15.94%	15.32%	1.87%	-0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between BBB and CLSM is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 28, 2023	0.67

The correlation between BBB and CLSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BBB vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BBB

BBB Risk / Return Rank: 9
BBB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
BBB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
BBB Omega Ratio Rank: 8
BBB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
BBB Martin Ratio Rank: 9

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 70
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 68
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
CLSM Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

BBB vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CYBER HORNET S&P 500 and Bitcoin 75/25 Strategy ETF (BBB) 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.

	BBB	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.04	1.79	-1.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.08	2.40	-2.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.32	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	2.98	-3.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.09	10.94	-11.02

BBB vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BBB Sharpe Ratio is -0.04, which is lower than the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BBB 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.

Drawdowns

BBB vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBB drawdown since its inception was -21.98%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBB and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BBB	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.98%	-27.77%	+5.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.74%	-8.50%	-9.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.60%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.56%	-4.11%	-3.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.56%	-16.20%	+11.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.41%	2.31%	+5.10%

Volatility

BBB vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CYBER HORNET S&P 500 and Bitcoin 75/25 Strategy ETF (BBB) is 4.99%, while Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) has a volatility of 5.68%. This indicates that BBB 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

	BBB	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.99%	5.68%	-0.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.88%	12.31%	+1.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.00%	14.21%	+3.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.89%	12.72%	+9.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.89%	12.72%	+9.17%

BBB vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BBB has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

BBB vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

BBB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than CLSM's 0.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BBB CYBER HORNET S&P 500 and Bitcoin 75/25 Strategy ETF	0.16%	0.21%	6.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.78%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BBB and CLSM in my portfolio?

BBB and CLSM have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BBB or CLSM?

CLSM has higher volatility (5.68%) compared to BBB (4.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BBB dropped -21.98% vs CLSM's -27.77%.

Which ETF is better, BBB or CLSM?

On 1-year performance, CLSM leads with 25.23% vs -0.63% for BBB. On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. On volatility, BBB has been the lower-risk option at 4.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BBB or CLSM?

Over the 1-year period, CLSM has performed better with a 25.23% return vs -0.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BBB or CLSM?

CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for BBB.

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

CLSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.16% for BBB.

What is the main difference between BBB and CLSM?

BBB is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CLSM is Tactical Allocation. BBB tracks S&P 500 and S&P Bitcoin 75/25 Blend Index, while CLSM tracks Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: CYBER HORNET and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for BBB and 0.82% for CLSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs -0.04), 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.