DEEP vs. CEFS
DEEP (Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF) and CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DEEP is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the DEEP-US - Acquirers Deep Value Index, while CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. DEEP is passively managed, while CEFS is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, DEEP returned 3.74%/yr vs 13.85%/yr for CEFS. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DEEP charges 0.80%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for CEFS.
Performance
DEEP vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DEEP achieves a 12.39% return, which is significantly lower than CEFS's 13.75% return.
DEEP
- 1D
- -2.02%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- YTD
- 12.39%
- 6M
- 11.91%
- 1Y
- 27.76%
- 3Y*
- 9.78%
- 5Y*
- 3.74%
- 10Y*
- 8.15%
CEFS
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 4.35%
- YTD
- 13.75%
- 6M
- 15.64%
- 1Y
- 25.00%
- 3Y*
- 22.04%
- 5Y*
- 13.85%
- 10Y*
- —
DEEP vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DEEP Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF | 12.39% | 5.69% | -2.97% | 22.37% | -17.71% | 35.66% | -9.96% | 12.54% | -7.17% | 20.86% |
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF | 13.75% | 16.67% | 23.48% | 20.99% | -7.08% | 17.86% | 3.40% | 28.41% | -9.97% | 7.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between DEEP and CEFS is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2017 | 0.48 |
The correlation between DEEP and CEFS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
DEEP vs. CEFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DEEP
CEFS
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Energy
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Real Estate
Utilities
-
Industrials
DEEP
CEFS
Consumer Cyclical
DEEP
CEFS
Consumer Defensive
DEEP
CEFS
Financial Services
DEEP
CEFS
Technology
DEEP
CEFS
Healthcare
DEEP
CEFS
Energy
DEEP
CEFS
Basic Materials
DEEP
CEFS
Communication Services
DEEP
CEFS
Real Estate
DEEP
CEFS
Utilities
DEEP
-
CEFS
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
DEEP vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank
DEEP
CEFS
DEEP vs. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF (DEEP) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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.
| DEEP | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.48 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.35 | 4.43 | -2.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.76 | 17.26 | -10.50 |
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
| DEEP | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.46 | 2.53 | -1.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 | 1.06 | -0.89 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.34 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 0.79 | -0.50 |
Drawdowns
DEEP vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DEEP drawdown since its inception was -52.52%, which is greater than CEFS's maximum drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DEEP and CEFS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DEEP | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.52% | -38.99% | -13.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.87% | -5.67% | -6.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.40% | -13.37% | -15.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.40% | -16.85% | -11.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.52% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.02% | -0.51% | -1.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.40% | -3.67% | -6.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.12% | 1.45% | +2.67% |
Volatility
DEEP vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison
Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF (DEEP) has a higher volatility of 5.67% compared to Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) at 3.37%. This indicates that DEEP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DEEP | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.67% | 3.37% | +2.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.29% | 8.56% | +3.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.18% | 9.95% | +9.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.65% | 13.08% | +8.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.27% | 15.33% | +8.94% |
DEEP vs. CEFS - Expense Ratio Comparison
DEEP has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFS's 1.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
DEEP vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison
DEEP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than CEFS's 7.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF | 7.10% | 7.84% | 8.79% | 9.20% | 11.32% | 10.73% | 8.61% | 8.10% | 10.43% | 5.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
DEEP Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF | 1.52% | 1.78% | 1.96% | 1.67% | 1.28% | 1.43% | 4.03% | 3.49% | 1.51% | 2.01% | 3.14% | 3.98% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DEEP and CEFS have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DEEP has higher volatility (5.67%) compared to CEFS (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DEEP dropped -52.52% vs CEFS's -38.99%.
On 5-year performance, CEFS leads with 13.85% vs 3.74% for DEEP. On fees, DEEP is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, CEFS has been the lower-risk option at 3.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CEFS has performed better with a 13.85% return vs 3.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DEEP is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for CEFS.
CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.10%, compared with 1.52% for DEEP.
DEEP is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while CEFS is Event Driven. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for DEEP and 1.29% for CEFS.
CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.46), 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 DEEP and CEFS
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