CEFS vs. HTEC
CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) and HTEC (ROBO Global Healthcare Technology and Innovation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts, while HTEC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the ROBO Global® Healthcare Technology and Innovation Index. CEFS is actively managed, while HTEC is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFS returned 13.85%/yr vs -4.88%/yr for HTEC. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFS charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for HTEC.
Performance
CEFS vs. HTEC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFS achieves a 13.75% return, which is significantly higher than HTEC's -2.96% return.
CEFS
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 4.35%
- YTD
- 13.75%
- 6M
- 15.64%
- 1Y
- 25.00%
- 3Y*
- 22.04%
- 5Y*
- 13.85%
- 10Y*
- —
HTEC
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 3.12%
- YTD
- -2.96%
- 6M
- -3.90%
- 1Y
- 26.68%
- 3Y*
- 5.17%
- 5Y*
- -4.88%
- 10Y*
- —
CEFS vs. HTEC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF | 13.75% | 16.67% | 23.48% | 20.99% | -7.08% | 17.86% | 3.40% | 6.44% |
HTEC ROBO Global Healthcare Technology and Innovation ETF | -2.96% | 23.91% | 2.68% | -2.94% | -33.72% | -0.28% | 65.01% | 9.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFS and HTEC is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2019 | 0.48 |
The correlation between CEFS and HTEC shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.52 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CEFS vs. HTEC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CEFS
HTEC
Financial Services
Technology
Energy
Industrials
Healthcare
Utilities
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
CEFS
HTEC
Technology
CEFS
HTEC
Energy
CEFS
HTEC
Industrials
CEFS
HTEC
Healthcare
CEFS
HTEC
Utilities
CEFS
HTEC
-
Communication Services
CEFS
HTEC
-
Consumer Cyclical
CEFS
HTEC
-
Consumer Defensive
CEFS
HTEC
-
Basic Materials
CEFS
HTEC
-
Real Estate
CEFS
HTEC
-
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
CEFS vs. HTEC — Risk / Return Rank
CEFS
HTEC
CEFS vs. HTEC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and ROBO Global Healthcare Technology and Innovation ETF (HTEC). 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.
| CEFS | HTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.23 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.43 | 1.64 | +2.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.26 | 4.07 | +13.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CEFS | HTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.53 | 1.32 | +1.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.06 | -0.20 | +1.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 0.21 | +0.59 |
Drawdowns
CEFS vs. HTEC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFS drawdown since its inception was -38.99%, smaller than the maximum HTEC drawdown of -57.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFS and HTEC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFS | HTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.99% | -57.53% | +18.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.67% | -16.31% | +10.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.37% | -28.67% | +15.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.85% | -56.10% | +39.25% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.51% | -33.25% | +32.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.67% | -28.99% | +25.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.45% | 6.57% | -5.12% |
Volatility
CEFS vs. HTEC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) is 3.37%, while ROBO Global Healthcare Technology and Innovation ETF (HTEC) has a volatility of 5.82%. This indicates that CEFS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HTEC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFS | HTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.37% | 5.82% | -2.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.56% | 14.90% | -6.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.95% | 20.32% | -10.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.08% | 24.39% | -11.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.33% | 25.46% | -10.13% |
CEFS vs. HTEC - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEFS has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than HTEC's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEFS vs. HTEC - Dividend Comparison
CEFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.10%, more than HTEC's 1.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF | 7.10% | 7.84% | 8.79% | 9.20% | 11.32% | 10.73% | 8.61% | 8.10% | 10.43% | 5.02% |
HTEC ROBO Global Healthcare Technology and Innovation ETF | 1.01% | 0.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFS and HTEC have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
HTEC has higher volatility (5.82%) compared to CEFS (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFS dropped -38.99% vs HTEC's -57.53%.
On 5-year performance, CEFS leads with 13.85% vs -4.88% for HTEC. On fees, HTEC is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, CEFS has been the lower-risk option at 3.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CEFS has performed better with a 13.85% return vs -4.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
HTEC is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for CEFS.
CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.10%, compared with 1.01% for HTEC.
CEFS is categorized as Event Driven, while HTEC is Health & Biotech Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for CEFS and 0.68% for HTEC.
CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.32), 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 CEFS and HTEC
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