CFIT vs. MBS

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

CFIT (Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF) and MBS (Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CFIT returned 13.11% vs 7.19% for MBS. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CFIT charges 0.71%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for MBS.

Performance

CFIT vs. MBS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CFIT achieves a 6.14% return, which is significantly higher than MBS's 0.91% return.

CFIT

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 2.43%
• YTD: 6.14%
• 6M: 6.20%
• 1Y: 13.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MBS

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: -0.10%
• YTD: 0.91%
• 6M: 1.14%
• 1Y: 7.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CFIT vs. MBS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	6.14%	3.59%
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF	0.91%	5.68%

Correlation

The correlation between CFIT and MBS is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2025	0.37

Return for Risk

CFIT vs. MBS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CFIT

CFIT Risk / Return Rank: 69
CFIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
CFIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
CFIT Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CFIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CFIT Martin Ratio Rank: 63

MBS

MBS Risk / Return Rank: 71
MBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
MBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
MBS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
MBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
MBS Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

CFIT vs. MBS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). 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.

	CFIT	MBS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.48	-0.08
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.38	3.73	-0.36
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.48	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.07	3.12	-0.06
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.57	9.95	+1.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CFIT vs. MBS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFIT Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the MBS Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFIT and MBS, 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

	CFIT	MBS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.48	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.55	1.64	-0.08

Drawdowns

CFIT vs. MBS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFIT drawdown since its inception was -4.23%, roughly equal to the maximum MBS drawdown of -4.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFIT and MBS.

Drawdown Indicators

	CFIT	MBS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.23%	-4.09%	-0.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.23%	-2.20%	-2.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.18%	+1.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.21%	-1.02%	-0.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	0.69%	+0.43%

Volatility

CFIT vs. MBS - Volatility Comparison

Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) has a higher volatility of 1.63% compared to Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) at 0.87%. This indicates that CFIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MBS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CFIT	MBS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.63%	0.87%	+0.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.37%	2.00%	+2.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.49%	2.93%	+2.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.45%	3.99%	+1.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.45%	3.99%	+1.46%

CFIT vs. MBS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CFIT has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is higher than MBS's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

CFIT vs. MBS - Dividend Comparison

CFIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.07%, less than MBS's 5.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	4.07%	3.14%	0.00%
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF	5.60%	5.28%	4.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CFIT and MBS in my portfolio?

CFIT and MBS have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CFIT or MBS?

CFIT has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to MBS (0.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFIT dropped -4.23% vs MBS's -4.09%.

Which ETF is better, CFIT or MBS?

On 1-year performance, CFIT leads with 13.11% vs 7.19% for MBS. On fees, MBS is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, MBS has been the lower-risk option at 0.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CFIT or MBS?

Over the 1-year period, CFIT has performed better with a 13.11% return vs 7.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CFIT or MBS?

MBS is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for CFIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CFIT or MBS?

MBS has the higher dividend yield at 5.60%, compared with 4.07% for CFIT.

What is the main difference between CFIT and MBS?

They also come from different issuers: Cambria and Angel Oak. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for CFIT and 0.49% for MBS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MBS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 2.40), 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.