PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CEFS vs. QNZIX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CEFS vs. QNZIX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) and QNZIX (AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I) are both funds - CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts, while QNZIX is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by AQR Funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CEFS returned 22.04%/yr vs 32.65%/yr for QNZIX. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFS charges 1.29%/yr vs 1.27%/yr for QNZIX.

Performance

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I (QNZIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFS achieves a 13.75% return, which is significantly lower than QNZIX's 18.23% return.

CEFS

1D
-0.51%
1M
4.35%
YTD
13.75%
6M
15.64%
1Y
25.00%
3Y*
22.04%
5Y*
13.85%
10Y*
—

QNZIX

1D
0.69%
1M
4.17%
YTD
18.23%
6M
20.50%
1Y
38.49%
3Y*
32.65%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
CEFS
Saba Closed-End Funds ETF		13.75%16.67%23.48%20.99%-3.20%
QNZIX
AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I		18.23%23.26%35.22%23.03%1.57%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFS and QNZIX is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022

0.42

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Saba Closed-End Funds ETF

AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I

Often compared with CEFS:
CEFS vs. PDICEFS vs. BIZDCEFS vs. SCHDCEFS vs. PEXCEFS vs. BSTZCEFS vs. CCEFCEFS vs. HNDL
Often compared with QNZIX:
QNZIX vs. QLEIXQNZIX vs. QRPIXQNZIX vs. QDSIXQNZIX vs. MMTMQNZIX vs. QAIQNZIX vs. QMNNXQNZIX vs. QLENX

Return for Risk

CEFS vs. QNZIX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CEFS
CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
QNZIX
QNZIX Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
QNZIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QNZIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
QNZIX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
QNZIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
QNZIX Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I (QNZIX). 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.

CEFSQNZIXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.53
3.65

-1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.71
4.76

-1.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.65

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.43

8.07

-3.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.26

32.68

-15.42

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFS Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is lower than the QNZIX Sharpe Ratio of 3.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFS and QNZIX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CEFSQNZIXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.53

3.65

-1.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.06

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

2.00

-1.20

Drawdowns

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFS drawdown since its inception was -38.99%, which is greater than QNZIX's maximum drawdown of -18.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFS and QNZIX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CEFSQNZIXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.99%

-18.35%

-20.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.67%

-4.86%

-0.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.37%

-13.51%

+0.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.85%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.51%

0.00%

-0.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.67%

-2.77%

-0.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.45%

1.20%

+0.25%

Volatility

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Volatility Comparison

Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) has a higher volatility of 3.37% compared to AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I (QNZIX) at 2.27%. This indicates that CEFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QNZIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CEFSQNZIXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.37%

2.27%

+1.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.56%

7.15%

+1.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.95%

10.80%

-0.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.08%

12.04%

+1.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.33%

12.04%

+3.29%

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFS has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than QNZIX's 1.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFS vs. QNZIX - Dividend Comparison

CEFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.10%, more than QNZIX's 0.90% yield.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
QNZIX
AQR Trend Total Return Fund Class I		0.90%1.07%16.81%23.32%2.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CEFS and QNZIX have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CEFS has higher volatility (3.37%) compared to QNZIX (2.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFS dropped -38.99% vs QNZIX's -18.35%.

QNZIX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.65 vs 2.53), 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 CEFS and QNZIX

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