BSR vs. CEFZ
BSR (Beacon Selective Risk ETF) and CEFZ (RiverNorth Active Income ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. BSR is passively managed, while CEFZ is actively managed. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BSR charges 1.10%/yr vs 3.36%/yr for CEFZ.
Performance
BSR vs. CEFZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSR achieves a 2.28% return, which is significantly lower than CEFZ's 4.53% return.
BSR
- 1D
- 0.46%
- 1M
- -0.59%
- 6M
- -1.03%
- YTD
- 2.28%
- 1Y
- 7.86%
- 3Y*
- 5.83%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 7.14%
CEFZ
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- -1.16%
- 6M
- 2.29%
- YTD
- 4.53%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $62.80K | $47.57K | $82.93K | |
| $177.45K | $117.53K | $123.01K |
BSR vs. CEFZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF | 2.28% | 5.46% |
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 4.53% | 7.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSR and CEFZ is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025 | 0.62 |
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
BSR vs. CEFZ — Risk / Return Rank
BSR
CEFZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BSR vs. CEFZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) and RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ). 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.
| BSR | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.16 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.78 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BSR vs. CEFZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSR drawdown since its inception was -15.68%, which is greater than CEFZ's maximum drawdown of -6.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSR and CEFZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSR | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.68% | -6.66% | -9.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.15% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.45% | -1.78% | -3.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.60% | -1.22% | -3.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.56% | — | — |
Volatility
BSR vs. CEFZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSR | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.97% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.64% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.08% | 10.23% | -1.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.99% | 10.23% | +5.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.99% | 10.23% | +5.76% |
BSR vs. CEFZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
BSR has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFZ's 3.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
BSR vs. CEFZ - Dividend Comparison
BSR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.83%, less than CEFZ's 10.13% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF | 2.83% | 2.89% | 0.89% | 1.08% |
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 10.13% | 4.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSR and CEFZ have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BSR is cheaper at 1.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BSR is cheaper with a 1.10% expense ratio, compared with 3.36% for CEFZ.
CEFZ has the higher dividend yield at 10.13%, compared with 2.83% for BSR.
They also come from different issuers: American Beacon and RiverNorth. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BSR and 3.36% for CEFZ.
Find the right allocation for BSR and CEFZ
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