DWUS vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DWUS (AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM US Core ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DWUS is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by AdvisorShares, while CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed. DWUS is actively managed, while CLSM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DWUS returned 19.90%/yr vs 13.32%/yr for CLSM. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DWUS charges 1.17%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

DWUS vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM US Core ETF (DWUS) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DWUS achieves a 13.47% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 16.60% return.

DWUS

• 1D: -3.80%
• 1M: 2.52%
• YTD: 13.47%
• 6M: 11.91%
• 1Y: 22.83%
• 3Y*: 19.90%
• 5Y*: 11.23%
• 10Y*: —

CLSM

• 1D: -1.97%
• 1M: -0.30%
• YTD: 16.60%
• 6M: 15.06%
• 1Y: 29.00%
• 3Y*: 13.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DWUS vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DWUS AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM US Core ETF	13.47%	12.75%	20.26%	20.62%	-17.89%	8.95%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	16.60%	15.32%	1.87%	3.78%	-23.23%	8.22%

Correlation

The correlation between DWUS and CLSM is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2021	0.67

Over the past year, DWUS and CLSM have become more correlated (0.89) than their long-term average of 0.67, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

DWUS vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

DWUS

DWUS Risk / Return Rank: 39
DWUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
DWUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
DWUS Omega Ratio Rank: 38
DWUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
DWUS Martin Ratio Rank: 45

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 72
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 71
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
CLSM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

DWUS vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM US Core ETF (DWUS) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). 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.

	DWUS	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	2.09	-0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.76	2.78	-1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.38	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	3.43	-1.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.03	13.40	-6.37

DWUS vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DWUS Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is lower than the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DWUS and CLSM, 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

DWUS vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DWUS drawdown since its inception was -30.47%, which is greater than CLSM's maximum drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DWUS and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	DWUS	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.47%	-27.77%	-2.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.98%	-8.50%	-3.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.63%	-14.60%	-5.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.80%	-3.57%	-0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.82%	-16.34%	+9.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.26%	2.17%	+1.09%

Volatility

DWUS vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM US Core ETF (DWUS) has a higher volatility of 10.06% compared to Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) at 6.46%. This indicates that DWUS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DWUS	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.06%	6.46%	+3.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.22%	12.06%	+3.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.02%	13.93%	+4.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.14%	12.70%	+6.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.41%	12.70%	+9.71%

DWUS vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DWUS has a 1.17% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

DWUS vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

DWUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%, less than CLSM's 0.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.77%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%	0.00%
DWUS AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM US Core ETF	0.03%	0.03%	0.18%	0.29%	0.89%	0.35%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DWUS and CLSM in my portfolio?

DWUS and CLSM have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DWUS or CLSM?

DWUS has higher volatility (10.06%) compared to CLSM (6.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DWUS dropped -30.47% vs CLSM's -27.77%.

Which ETF is better, DWUS or CLSM?

On 3-year performance, DWUS leads with 19.90% vs 13.32% for CLSM. On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. On volatility, CLSM has been the lower-risk option at 6.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DWUS or CLSM?

Over the 3-year period, DWUS has performed better with a 19.90% return vs 13.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DWUS or CLSM?

CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 1.17% for DWUS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DWUS or CLSM?

CLSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.77%, compared with 0.03% for DWUS.

What is the main difference between DWUS and CLSM?

DWUS is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CLSM is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 1.17% for DWUS and 0.82% for CLSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.28), 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.