PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CCNR vs. RISR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CCNR vs. RISR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) and FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF (RISR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCNR achieves a 16.37% return, which is significantly higher than RISR's 4.75% return.


CCNR

1D
0.17%
1M
2.70%
6M
2.27%
YTD
16.37%
1Y
50.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
24.52%

RISR

1D
-0.15%
1M
1.47%
6M
4.83%
YTD
4.75%
1Y
6.29%
3Y*
10.07%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
14.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$256.37K$2.34M$1.27M
$3.20M$3.07M$3.51M

CCNR vs. RISR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CCNR and RISR is -0.16, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2024

-0.06

The correlation between CCNR and RISR shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to -0.06 (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

CCNR vs. RISR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CCNR
CCNR Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
CCNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CCNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
CCNR Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
CCNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
CCNR Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

RISR
RISR Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
RISR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RISR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
RISR Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
RISR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
RISR Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CCNR vs. RISR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) and FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF (RISR). 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.


CCNRRISRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.22

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.92

2.42

+1.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.72

5.79

+5.93

CCNR vs. RISR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is higher than the RISR Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCNR and RISR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CCNR vs. RISR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCNR drawdown since its inception was -20.06%, which is greater than RISR's maximum drawdown of -14.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCNR and RISR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CCNRRISRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.06%

-14.31%

-5.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.88%

-2.61%

-10.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.53%

-0.15%

-9.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.02%

-2.12%

-1.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.30%

1.09%

+3.21%

Volatility

CCNR vs. RISR - Volatility Comparison

ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) has a higher volatility of 4.61% compared to FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF (RISR) at 1.13%. This indicates that CCNR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RISR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CCNRRISRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.61%

1.13%

+3.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.49%

3.57%

+9.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.61%

5.25%

+13.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.96%

11.67%

+8.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.96%

11.67%

+8.29%

CCNR vs. RISR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCNR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than RISR's 1.13% expense ratio.


Dividends

CCNR vs. RISR - Dividend Comparison

CCNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.99%, less than RISR's 5.88% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
CCNR
ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF
2.99%3.48%1.27%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RISR
FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF
5.88%5.95%5.67%7.96%4.26%0.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


CCNR and RISR have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CCNR has higher volatility (4.61%) compared to RISR (1.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCNR dropped -20.06% vs RISR's -14.31%.

On 1-year performance, CCNR leads with 50.28% vs 6.29% for RISR. On fees, CCNR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RISR has been the lower-risk option at 1.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CCNR has performed better with a 50.28% return vs 6.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CCNR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 1.13% for RISR.

RISR has the higher dividend yield at 5.88%, compared with 2.99% for CCNR.

CCNR is categorized as Natural Resources, while RISR is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: ALPS and FolioBeyond. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CCNR and 1.13% for RISR.

CCNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 1.20), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CCNR and RISR

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