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 2.30%/yr vs 2.17%/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 -5.28% return, which is significantly lower than FLMI's 2.47% return.
CANE
- 1D
- 0.54%
- 1M
- -6.67%
- YTD
- -5.28%
- 6M
- -5.84%
- 1Y
- -16.08%
- 3Y*
- -12.00%
- 5Y*
- 2.30%
- 10Y*
- -2.91%
FLMI
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- YTD
- 2.47%
- 6M
- 2.68%
- 1Y
- 7.87%
- 3Y*
- 5.72%
- 5Y*
- 2.17%
- 10Y*
- —
CANE vs. FLMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | -5.28% | -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 | 2.47% | 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 -0.26, 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 | -0.09 |
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 -0.26 (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 | -3.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.89 | 1.61 | -0.73 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.81 | 2.73 | -3.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.28 | 9.81 | -11.09 |
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 | -64.88% | -0.17% | -64.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.51% | -2.81% | -53.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.58% | 0.80% | +11.78% |
Volatility
CANE vs. FLMI - Volatility Comparison
Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF (FLMI) at 0.67%. 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 | 4.97% | 0.67% | +4.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.84% | 2.06% | +13.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.44% | 2.93% | +17.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.98% | 4.43% | +16.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.70% | 4.71% | +16.99% |
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 3.87%.
| 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 | 3.87% | 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 -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CANE has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to FLMI (0.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANE dropped -81.30% vs FLMI's -14.66%.
On 5-year performance, CANE leads with 2.30% vs 2.17% for FLMI. On fees, FLMI is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, FLMI has been the lower-risk option at 0.67%. 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 2.30% return vs 2.17%. 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 3.87%, 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 -0.79), 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