CLSM vs. THRV
CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) and THRV (Prospera Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed, while THRV is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Prospera Funds. CLSM is passively managed, while THRV is actively managed. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CLSM charges 0.82%/yr vs 1.80%/yr for THRV.
Performance
CLSM vs. THRV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLSM achieves a 19.63% return, which is significantly higher than THRV's 2.04% return.
CLSM
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 7.03%
- YTD
- 19.63%
- 6M
- 19.45%
- 1Y
- 33.43%
- 3Y*
- 13.57%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
THRV
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 0.18%
- YTD
- 2.04%
- 6M
- 1.84%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CLSM vs. THRV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF | 19.63% | 1.80% |
THRV Prospera Income ETF | 2.04% | 0.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLSM and THRV is 0.59, 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 Oct 1, 2025 | 0.59 |
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
CLSM vs. THRV — Risk / Return Rank
CLSM
THRV
CLSM vs. THRV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) and Prospera Income ETF (THRV). 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.
| CLSM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.95 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.33 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CLSM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.64 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 1.13 | -0.79 |
Drawdowns
CLSM vs. THRV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLSM drawdown since its inception was -27.77%, which is greater than THRV's maximum drawdown of -1.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLSM and THRV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLSM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.77% | -1.50% | -26.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.50% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.60% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.06% | -0.34% | -0.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.48% | -0.44% | -16.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.05% | — | — |
Volatility
CLSM vs. THRV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLSM | THRV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.60% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.57% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.73% | 2.92% | +9.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.47% | 2.92% | +9.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.47% | 2.92% | +9.55% |
CLSM vs. THRV - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLSM has a 0.82% expense ratio, which is lower than THRV's 1.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLSM vs. THRV - Dividend Comparison
CLSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.75%, less than THRV's 4.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF | 0.75% | 0.90% | 2.13% | 2.58% | 3.17% | 0.59% |
THRV Prospera Income ETF | 4.70% | 1.67% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLSM and THRV have a correlation of 0.59, 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 1.80% for THRV.
THRV has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 0.75% for CLSM.
CLSM is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while THRV is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: Cabana and Prospera Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.82% for CLSM and 1.80% for THRV.
Find the right allocation for CLSM and THRV
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