CANE vs. FLMI
CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) and FLMI (Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CANE is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark, while FLMI is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. CANE is passively managed, while FLMI is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CANE returned 2.40%/yr vs 1.92%/yr for FLMI. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CANE charges 1.88%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for FLMI.
Performance
CANE vs. FLMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CANE achieves a -2.31% return, which is significantly lower than FLMI's 2.25% 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%
FLMI
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- -0.14%
- 6M
- 1.52%
- YTD
- 2.25%
- 1Y
- 7.86%
- 3Y*
- 5.57%
- 5Y*
- 1.92%
- 10Y*
- —
CANE vs. FLMI - 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% | 0.51% |
FLMI Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF | 2.25% | 5.89% | 4.91% | 7.89% | -10.23% | 4.06% | 6.11% | 6.71% | 0.29% | -0.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANE and FLMI is -0.25, 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 | -0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2017 | 0.00 |
The correlation between CANE and FLMI shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to 0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. FLMI — Risk / Return Rank
CANE
FLMI
CANE vs. FLMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF (FLMI). 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 | FLMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.94 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 1.62 | -0.72 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.70 | 2.73 | -3.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.06 | 10.08 | -11.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CANE vs. FLMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANE drawdown since its inception was -81.30%, which is greater than FLMI's maximum drawdown of -14.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANE and FLMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CANE | FLMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -81.30% | -14.66% | -66.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.82% | -2.90% | -16.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -41.73% | -5.31% | -36.42% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.73% | -14.66% | -27.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.29% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -63.78% | -0.72% | -63.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.54% | -2.79% | -53.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.01% | 0.78% | +12.23% |
Volatility
CANE vs. FLMI - Volatility Comparison
Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a higher volatility of 6.17% compared to Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF (FLMI) at 0.61%. This indicates that CANE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CANE | FLMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.17% | 0.61% | +5.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.26% | 2.11% | +14.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.18% | 2.93% | +17.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.01% | 4.43% | +16.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.60% | 4.70% | +16.90% |
CANE vs. FLMI - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANE has a 1.88% expense ratio, which is higher than FLMI's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
CANE vs. FLMI - Dividend Comparison
CANE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FLMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.92%.
| 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% |
FLMI Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF | 3.92% | 3.89% | 4.08% | 3.71% | 3.08% | 2.22% | 2.09% | 2.71% | 2.41% | 0.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CANE and FLMI have a correlation of -0.25, 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 FLMI (0.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANE dropped -81.30% vs FLMI's -14.66%.
On 5-year performance, CANE leads with 2.40% vs 1.92% for FLMI. On fees, FLMI is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, FLMI has been the lower-risk option at 0.61%. 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 1.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLMI is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.
FLMI has the higher dividend yield at 3.92%, compared with 0.00% for CANE.
CANE is categorized as Agricultural Commodities, while FLMI is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 1.88% for CANE and 0.30% for FLMI.
FLMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 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 FLMI
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