CEFS vs. THNQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) and THNQ (ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts, while THNQ is a Technology Equities fund tracking the ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence Index. CEFS is actively managed, while THNQ is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFS returned 13.85%/yr vs 17.90%/yr for THNQ. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CEFS charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for THNQ.

Performance

CEFS vs. THNQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF (THNQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFS achieves a 13.75% return, which is significantly lower than THNQ's 44.05% return.

CEFS

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

THNQ

• 1D: -2.20%
• 1M: 22.90%
• YTD: 44.05%
• 6M: 40.99%
• 1Y: 79.25%
• 3Y*: 37.91%
• 5Y*: 17.90%
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFS vs. THNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	13.75%	16.67%	23.48%	20.99%	-7.08%	17.86%	26.53%
THNQ ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF	44.05%	29.83%	18.82%	56.81%	-39.84%	9.10%	58.41%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFS and THNQ is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2020	0.51

The correlation between CEFS and THNQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

CEFS vs. THNQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CEFS	THNQ
Financial Services	48.9%	1.3%
Technology	12.4%	71.6%
Energy	11.2%	-
Industrials	6.7%	1.1%
Healthcare	4.6%	5.6%
Utilities	4.2%	-
Communication Services	4.1%	10.3%
Consumer Cyclical	3.3%	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.6%	-
Real Estate	1.2%	0.9%

Return for Risk

CEFS vs. THNQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 80
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 83

THNQ

THNQ Risk / Return Rank: 80
THNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
THNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
THNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 76
THNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
THNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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. THNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF (THNQ). 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	THNQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	3.01	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	3.58	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.46	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.43	4.33	+0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.26	14.31	+2.95
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. THNQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFS Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the THNQ Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFS and THNQ, 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

	CEFS	THNQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.53	3.01	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.06	0.62	+0.45
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	0.83	-0.03

Drawdowns

CEFS vs. THNQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFS drawdown since its inception was -38.99%, smaller than the maximum THNQ drawdown of -50.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFS and THNQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFS	THNQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.99%	-50.56%	+11.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.67%	-18.39%	+12.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.37%	-29.88%	+16.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.85%	-50.56%	+33.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.51%	-2.20%	+1.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.67%	-15.07%	+11.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.45%	5.56%	-4.11%

Volatility

CEFS vs. THNQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) is 3.37%, while ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF (THNQ) has a volatility of 8.50%. This indicates that CEFS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than THNQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CEFS	THNQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.37%	8.50%	-5.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.56%	20.69%	-12.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.95%	26.47%	-16.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.08%	29.09%	-16.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.33%	28.66%	-13.33%

CEFS vs. THNQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFS has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than THNQ's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFS vs. THNQ - Dividend Comparison

CEFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.10%, more than THNQ's 0.14% 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%
THNQ ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF	0.14%	0.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFS and THNQ in my portfolio?

CEFS and THNQ have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CEFS or THNQ?

THNQ has higher volatility (8.50%) compared to CEFS (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFS dropped -38.99% vs THNQ's -50.56%.

Which ETF is better, CEFS or THNQ?

On 5-year performance, THNQ leads with 17.90% vs 13.85% for CEFS. On fees, THNQ 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.

Which ETF has performed better, CEFS or THNQ?

Over the 5-year period, THNQ has performed better with a 17.90% return vs 13.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFS or THNQ?

THNQ is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for CEFS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFS or THNQ?

CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.10%, compared with 0.14% for THNQ.

What is the main difference between CEFS and THNQ?

CEFS is categorized as Event Driven, while THNQ is Technology Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for CEFS and 0.68% for THNQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

THNQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 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.