CILGX vs. TMMAX
CILGX (Clarkston Fund) and TMMAX (SEI Institutional Managed Trust Tax-Managed Managed Volatility Fund) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, CILGX returned 1.47%/yr vs 9.25%/yr for TMMAX. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CILGX charges 0.70%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for TMMAX.
Performance
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CILGX achieves a -9.14% return, which is significantly lower than TMMAX's 1.88% return.
CILGX
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- -2.21%
- YTD
- -9.14%
- 6M
- -9.59%
- 1Y
- -0.83%
- 3Y*
- 4.41%
- 5Y*
- 1.47%
- 10Y*
- —
TMMAX
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- -3.35%
- YTD
- 1.88%
- 6M
- 1.20%
- 1Y
- 7.24%
- 3Y*
- 11.54%
- 5Y*
- 9.25%
- 10Y*
- 9.84%
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CILGX Clarkston Fund | -9.14% | 8.29% | 6.79% | 17.86% | -8.60% | 10.90% | 16.93% | 27.46% | -8.39% | 9.33% |
TMMAX SEI Institutional Managed Trust Tax-Managed Managed Volatility Fund | 1.88% | 11.03% | 17.07% | 7.32% | -3.11% | 24.10% | 1.32% | 24.00% | -2.84% | 15.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between CILGX and TMMAX is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2017 | 0.74 |
The correlation between CILGX and TMMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
CILGX vs. TMMAX — Risk / Return Rank
CILGX
TMMAX
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Clarkston Fund (CILGX) and SEI Institutional Managed Trust Tax-Managed Managed Volatility Fund (TMMAX). 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.
| CILGX | TMMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.42 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.17 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.07 | 1.43 | -1.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.16 | 4.88 | -5.04 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CILGX drawdown since its inception was -33.57%, smaller than the maximum TMMAX drawdown of -41.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CILGX and TMMAX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CILGX | TMMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.57% | -41.50% | +7.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.30% | -5.78% | -6.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.60% | -23.00% | +7.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.80% | -23.00% | +1.20% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.41% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.30% | -9.14% | -3.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.84% | -5.57% | -0.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.45% | 1.69% | +3.76% |
Volatility
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Volatility Comparison
Clarkston Fund (CILGX) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to SEI Institutional Managed Trust Tax-Managed Managed Volatility Fund (TMMAX) at 2.57%. This indicates that CILGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TMMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CILGX | TMMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.58% | 2.57% | +2.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.75% | 6.11% | +5.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.70% | 8.36% | +7.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.81% | 19.07% | -2.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.93% | 17.82% | +0.11% |
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
CILGX has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than TMMAX's 1.00% expense ratio.
Dividends
CILGX vs. TMMAX - Dividend Comparison
CILGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.50%, less than TMMAX's 24.83% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CILGX Clarkston Fund | 4.50% | 4.09% | 0.88% | 3.44% | 5.14% | 3.16% | 5.87% | 5.93% | 4.77% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TMMAX SEI Institutional Managed Trust Tax-Managed Managed Volatility Fund | 24.83% | 25.19% | 23.39% | 15.23% | 6.54% | 4.73% | 2.15% | 3.67% | 4.91% | 4.10% | 4.17% | 5.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CILGX and TMMAX have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CILGX has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to TMMAX (2.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CILGX dropped -33.57% vs TMMAX's -41.50%.
TMMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.99 vs -0.06), 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.
Find the right allocation for CILGX and TMMAX
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