PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CEFD vs. RULE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CEFD vs. RULE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFD achieves a 6.68% return, which is significantly lower than RULE's 28.07% return.


CEFD

1D
0.65%
1M
-1.19%
6M
3.84%
YTD
6.68%
1Y
13.16%
3Y*
13.50%
5Y*
2.89%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.91%

RULE

1D
0.68%
1M
-6.27%
6M
16.83%
YTD
28.07%
1Y
31.15%
3Y*
14.33%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
3.81%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$13.81K$22.66K$19.94K
$50.92K$51.15K$52.38K

CEFD vs. RULE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CEFD
ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN
6.68%14.15%20.06%8.36%-28.93%-0.36%
RULE
Adaptive Core ETF
28.07%4.60%7.59%6.29%-22.87%1.03%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFD and RULE is 0.72, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


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

0.72

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2021

0.62

The correlation between CEFD and RULE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CEFD vs. RULE — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFD
CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

RULE
RULE Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
RULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
RULE Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
RULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
RULE Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
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.

CEFD vs. RULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). 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.


CEFDRULEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.21

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.00

1.52

-0.52

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.48

6.20

-1.72

CEFD vs. RULE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFD Sharpe Ratio is 0.92, which is comparable to the RULE Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFD and RULE, 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

CEFD vs. RULE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFD drawdown since its inception was -36.95%, which is greater than RULE's maximum drawdown of -30.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFD and RULE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CEFDRULEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.95%

-30.48%

-6.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.51%

-19.49%

+6.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.76%

-20.21%

-1.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.29%

-14.67%

+12.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.46%

-14.72%

+3.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.79%

4.76%

-1.97%

Volatility

CEFD vs. RULE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) is 3.08%, while Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a volatility of 12.03%. This indicates that CEFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RULE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CEFDRULEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.08%

12.03%

-8.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.11%

24.87%

-12.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.68%

27.28%

-13.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.02%

16.87%

+1.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.22%

16.87%

+0.35%

CEFD vs. RULE - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than RULE's 1.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

CEFD vs. RULE - Dividend Comparison

CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.87%, while RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CEFD
ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN
14.87%14.88%13.90%14.76%16.56%10.31%5.37%
RULE
Adaptive Core ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%2.01%0.01%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CEFD and RULE have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RULE has higher volatility (12.03%) compared to CEFD (3.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFD dropped -36.95% vs RULE's -30.48%.

On 3-year performance, RULE leads with 14.33% vs 13.50% for CEFD. On fees, CEFD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 3.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, RULE has performed better with a 14.33% return vs 13.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CEFD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for RULE.

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.87%, compared with 0.00% for RULE.

They also come from different issuers: UBS and Mohr. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for CEFD and 1.10% for RULE.

RULE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs 0.92), 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 CEFD and RULE

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