CTEF vs. RUNN

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

CTEF (Castellan Targeted Equity ETF) and RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CTEF returned 61.52% vs 1.69% for RUNN. Their 0.36 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CTEF charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RUNN.

Performance

CTEF vs. RUNN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CTEF achieves a 33.99% return, which is significantly higher than RUNN's 1.94% return.

CTEF

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -1.71%
• 6M: 26.66%
• YTD: 33.99%
• 1Y: 61.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 67.86%

RUNN

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 2.15%
• 6M: -1.57%
• YTD: 1.94%
• 1Y: 1.69%
• 3Y*: 8.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.45%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	$557.84K	$753.72K	$355.21K
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	$6.62M	$3.92M	$2.57M

CTEF vs. RUNN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	33.99%	33.10%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	1.94%	1.61%

Correlation

The correlation between CTEF and RUNN is 0.36, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.36

Return for Risk

CTEF vs. RUNN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CTEF

CTEF Risk / Return Rank: 91
CTEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CTEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
CTEF Omega Ratio Rank: 89
CTEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CTEF Martin Ratio Rank: 93

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 11
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 11
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 12

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CTEF vs. RUNN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). 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.

	CTEF	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	0.04	+2.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.35	0.16	+3.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.02	+0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.96	0.05	+3.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.76	0.10	+16.65

CTEF vs. RUNN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CTEF Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is higher than the RUNN Sharpe Ratio of 0.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CTEF and RUNN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CTEF vs. RUNN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CTEF drawdown since its inception was -15.00%, smaller than the maximum RUNN drawdown of -16.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTEF and RUNN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CTEF	RUNN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.00%	-16.83%	+1.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.00%	-10.34%	-4.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.20%	-3.20%	-2.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.96%	-3.68%	+1.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.54%	4.90%	-1.36%

Volatility

CTEF vs. RUNN - Volatility Comparison

Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF) has a higher volatility of 6.91% compared to Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) at 5.07%. This indicates that CTEF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RUNN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CTEF	RUNN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.91%	5.07%	+1.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.80%	10.41%	+9.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.60%	13.65%	+9.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.66%	13.90%	+8.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.66%	13.90%	+8.76%

CTEF vs. RUNN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CTEF has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than RUNN's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

CTEF vs. RUNN - Dividend Comparison

CTEF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than RUNN's 0.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	0.06%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.54%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CTEF and RUNN in my portfolio?

CTEF and RUNN 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, CTEF or RUNN?

CTEF has higher volatility (6.91%) compared to RUNN (5.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTEF dropped -15.00% vs RUNN's -16.83%.

Which ETF is better, CTEF or RUNN?

On 1-year performance, CTEF leads with 61.52% vs 1.69% for RUNN. On fees, CTEF is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 5.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CTEF or RUNN?

Over the 1-year period, CTEF has performed better with a 61.52% return vs 1.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CTEF or RUNN?

CTEF is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CTEF or RUNN?

RUNN has the higher dividend yield at 0.54%, compared with 0.06% for CTEF.

What is the main difference between CTEF and RUNN?

They also come from different issuers: Castellan and Running Oak. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CTEF and 0.58% for RUNN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 0.04), 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.