CEFZ vs. CLSM
CEFZ (RiverNorth Active Income ETF) and CLSM (ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. CEFZ is actively managed, while CLSM is passively managed. Their 0.66 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CEFZ charges 3.36%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.
Performance
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFZ achieves a 4.53% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 13.76% return.
CEFZ
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- -1.16%
- 6M
- 2.29%
- YTD
- 4.53%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
CLSM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -2.10%
- 6M
- 10.80%
- YTD
- 13.76%
- 1Y
- 23.29%
- 3Y*
- 10.82%
- 5Y*
- 2.98%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.85%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $177.45K | $117.53K | $123.01K | |
| $170.87K | $557.41K | $324.92K |
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 4.53% | 7.41% |
CLSM ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF | 13.76% | 8.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFZ and CLSM is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025 | 0.66 |
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
CEFZ vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank
CEFZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CLSM
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ) and ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). 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 | CLSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.27 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.61 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 8.32 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFZ drawdown since its inception was -6.66%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFZ and CLSM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFZ | CLSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.66% | -27.77% | +21.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.50% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.60% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.77% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.78% | -5.91% | +4.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.22% | -16.09% | +14.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.66% | — |
Volatility
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFZ | CLSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.38% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 12.63% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.23% | 14.63% | -4.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.23% | 12.75% | -2.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.23% | 12.75% | -2.52% |
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEFZ has a 3.36% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEFZ vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison
CEFZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.13%, more than CLSM's 0.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 10.13% | 4.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CLSM ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF | 0.79% | 0.90% | 2.13% | 2.58% | 3.17% | 0.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFZ and CLSM have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 3.36% for CEFZ.
CEFZ has the higher dividend yield at 10.13%, compared with 0.79% for CLSM.
They also come from different issuers: RiverNorth and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 3.36% for CEFZ and 0.82% for CLSM.
Find the right allocation for CEFZ and CLSM
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