CANE vs. FCAL
CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) and FCAL (First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CANE is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark, while FCAL is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by First Trust. CANE is passively managed, while FCAL is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CANE returned 2.40%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for FCAL. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. CANE charges 1.88%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FCAL.
Performance
CANE vs. FCAL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CANE achieves a -2.31% return, which is significantly lower than FCAL's 1.74% return.
CANE
- 1D
- -2.85%
- 1M
- 1.06%
- 6M
- 0.53%
- YTD
- -2.31%
- 1Y
- -13.75%
- 3Y*
- -10.13%
- 5Y*
- 2.40%
- 10Y*
- -2.85%
FCAL
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- -0.21%
- 6M
- 1.06%
- YTD
- 1.74%
- 1Y
- 7.00%
- 3Y*
- 3.34%
- 5Y*
- 0.52%
- 10Y*
- —
CANE vs. FCAL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | -2.31% | -14.65% | -7.79% | 30.06% | 3.59% | 36.30% | -3.85% | -0.97% | -27.52% | 7.71% |
FCAL First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF | 1.74% | 3.19% | 1.90% | 6.08% | -9.50% | 3.26% | 3.51% | 9.32% | 0.31% | 4.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANE and FCAL is -0.26, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2017 | -0.01 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between CANE and FCAL has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.01 to -0.26, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
CANE vs. FCAL — Risk / Return Rank
CANE
FCAL
CANE vs. FCAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL). 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.
| CANE | FCAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 1.60 | -0.70 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.70 | 2.73 | -3.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.06 | 10.48 | -11.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CANE vs. FCAL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANE drawdown since its inception was -81.30%, which is greater than FCAL's maximum drawdown of -14.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANE and FCAL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CANE | FCAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -81.30% | -14.81% | -66.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.82% | -2.57% | -17.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -41.73% | -5.46% | -36.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.73% | -14.44% | -27.29% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.29% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -63.78% | -0.83% | -62.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.54% | -3.31% | -53.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.01% | 0.67% | +12.34% |
Volatility
CANE vs. FCAL - Volatility Comparison
Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a higher volatility of 6.17% compared to First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL) at 0.64%. This indicates that CANE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CANE | FCAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.17% | 0.64% | +5.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.26% | 2.14% | +14.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.18% | 2.70% | +17.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.01% | 4.24% | +16.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.60% | 5.22% | +16.38% |
CANE vs. FCAL - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANE has a 1.88% expense ratio, which is higher than FCAL's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CANE vs. FCAL - Dividend Comparison
CANE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FCAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.36%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FCAL First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF | 3.36% | 3.22% | 2.99% | 2.74% | 2.38% | 2.03% | 2.11% | 2.68% | 2.99% | 1.30% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CANE and FCAL have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CANE has higher volatility (6.17%) compared to FCAL (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANE dropped -81.30% vs FCAL's -14.81%.
On 5-year performance, CANE leads with 2.40% vs 0.52% for FCAL. On fees, FCAL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FCAL has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CANE has performed better with a 2.40% return vs 0.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FCAL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.
FCAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.36%, compared with 0.00% for CANE.
CANE is categorized as Agricultural Commodities, while FCAL is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.88% for CANE and 0.50% for FCAL.
FCAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs -0.68), 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.
Find the right allocation for CANE and FCAL
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