CEFZ vs. ALLW

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

CEFZ (RiverNorth Active Income ETF) and ALLW (State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CEFZ charges 3.36%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for ALLW.

Performance

CEFZ vs. ALLW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ) and State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CEFZ having a 6.00% return and ALLW slightly higher at 6.10%.

CEFZ

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.48%
• 6M: 3.59%
• YTD: 6.00%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ALLW

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: -1.90%
• 6M: 2.48%
• YTD: 6.10%
• 1Y: 17.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFZ vs. ALLW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF	6.00%	7.41%
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF	6.10%	10.17%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFZ and ALLW is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025	0.52

Return for Risk

CEFZ vs. ALLW — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFZ

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

ALLW

ALLW Risk / Return Rank: 59
ALLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
ALLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
ALLW Omega Ratio Rank: 58
ALLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
ALLW Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

CEFZ vs. ALLW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ) and State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). 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.

	CEFZ	ALLW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.59	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.15	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.29	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.46	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	8.86	—

Drawdowns

CEFZ vs. ALLW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFZ drawdown since its inception was -6.66%, smaller than the maximum ALLW drawdown of -8.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFZ and ALLW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFZ	ALLW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.66%	-8.78%	+2.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-7.23%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-3.61%	+3.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.19%	-1.35%	+0.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.00%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CEFZ	ALLW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.89%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	9.33%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.32%	11.15%	-0.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.32%	12.57%	-2.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.32%	12.57%	-2.25%

CEFZ vs. ALLW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFZ has a 3.36% expense ratio, which is higher than ALLW's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFZ vs. ALLW - Dividend Comparison

CEFZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.10%, more than ALLW's 4.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF	4.41%	4.67%
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF	9.10%	4.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFZ and ALLW in my portfolio?

CEFZ and ALLW have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CEFZ or ALLW?

On fees, ALLW is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFZ or ALLW?

ALLW is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 3.36% for CEFZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFZ or ALLW?

CEFZ has the higher dividend yield at 9.10%, compared with 4.41% for ALLW.

What is the main difference between CEFZ and ALLW?

They also come from different issuers: RiverNorth and State Street. Their fees differ too: 3.36% for CEFZ and 0.85% for ALLW.