CANE vs. RSMV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) and RSMV (Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CANE is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark, while RSMV is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Teucrium. CANE is passively managed, while RSMV is actively managed. Over the past year, CANE returned -14.28% vs 25.46% for RSMV. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CANE charges 1.88%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for RSMV.

Performance

CANE vs. RSMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CANE achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly lower than RSMV's 8.93% return.

CANE

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -5.56%
• YTD: -0.77%
• 6M: 0.83%
• 1Y: -14.28%
• 3Y*: -10.43%
• 5Y*: 2.90%
• 10Y*: -2.23%

RSMV

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 7.76%
• YTD: 8.93%
• 6M: 9.49%
• 1Y: 25.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CANE vs. RSMV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund	-0.77%	-12.82%
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF	8.93%	11.08%

Correlation

The correlation between CANE and RSMV is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2025	0.02

Return for Risk

CANE vs. RSMV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CANE

CANE Risk / Return Rank: 3
CANE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Martin Ratio Rank: 3

RSMV

RSMV Risk / Return Rank: 68
RSMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
RSMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
RSMV Omega Ratio Rank: 63
RSMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
RSMV Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

CANE vs. RSMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV). 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.

	CANE	RSMV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.69	2.14	-2.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.90	2.99	-3.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.38	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.72	3.52	-4.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.18	13.44	-14.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CANE vs. RSMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CANE Sharpe Ratio is -0.69, which is lower than the RSMV Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CANE and RSMV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CANE	RSMV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.69	2.14	-2.84
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.14	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.10	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.26	1.02	-1.28

Drawdowns

CANE vs. RSMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CANE drawdown since its inception was -81.30%, which is greater than RSMV's maximum drawdown of -17.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANE and RSMV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CANE	RSMV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-81.30%	-17.58%	-63.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.89%	-7.27%	-12.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-67.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-63.21%	-0.83%	-62.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.50%	-3.97%	-52.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.35%	1.90%	+10.45%

Volatility

CANE vs. RSMV - Volatility Comparison

Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a higher volatility of 6.85% compared to Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) at 4.52%. This indicates that CANE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CANE	RSMV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.85%	4.52%	+2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.81%	9.67%	+6.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.69%	11.94%	+8.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.07%	14.54%	+6.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.72%	14.54%	+7.18%

CANE vs. RSMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CANE has a 1.88% expense ratio, which is higher than RSMV's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CANE vs. RSMV - Dividend Comparison

CANE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RSMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%.

Position	TTM	2025
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund	0.00%	0.00%
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF	0.92%	1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CANE and RSMV in my portfolio?

CANE and RSMV have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CANE or RSMV?

CANE has higher volatility (6.85%) compared to RSMV (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANE dropped -81.30% vs RSMV's -17.58%.

Which ETF is better, CANE or RSMV?

On 1-year performance, RSMV leads with 25.46% vs -14.28% for CANE. On fees, RSMV is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, RSMV has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CANE or RSMV?

Over the 1-year period, RSMV has performed better with a 25.46% return vs -14.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CANE or RSMV?

RSMV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CANE or RSMV?

RSMV has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.00% for CANE.

What is the main difference between CANE and RSMV?

CANE is categorized as Agricultural Commodities, while RSMV is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.88% for CANE and 0.95% for RSMV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs -0.69), 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.