PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ELM vs. TFPN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ELM vs. TFPN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) and Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF (TFPN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ELM achieves a 6.28% return, which is significantly lower than TFPN's 25.19% return.


ELM

1D
-1.43%
1M
-0.17%
YTD
6.28%
6M
6.39%
1Y
17.21%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

TFPN

1D
-1.03%
1M
2.11%
YTD
25.19%
6M
22.97%
1Y
43.05%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ELM vs. TFPN - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ELM and TFPN is 0.60, 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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2025

0.56

The correlation between ELM and TFPN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.60 - 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

ELM vs. TFPN — Risk / Return Rank

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

ELM
ELM Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
ELM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ELM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
ELM Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
ELM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
ELM Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

TFPN
TFPN Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
TFPN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TFPN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
TFPN Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
TFPN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
TFPN Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ELM vs. TFPN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) and Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF (TFPN). 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.


ELMTFPNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.53

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.30

5.79

-3.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.37

19.17

-9.80

ELM vs. TFPN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ELM Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is lower than the TFPN Sharpe Ratio of 2.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ELM and TFPN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ELM vs. TFPN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ELM drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, smaller than the maximum TFPN drawdown of -16.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ELM and TFPN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ELMTFPNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.02%

-16.72%

+7.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.52%

-7.47%

-0.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.76%

-1.52%

-0.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.32%

-4.84%

+3.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.84%

2.25%

-0.41%

Volatility

ELM vs. TFPN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) is 3.63%, while Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF (TFPN) has a volatility of 6.23%. This indicates that ELM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TFPN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ELMTFPNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.63%

6.23%

-2.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.11%

12.52%

-4.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.79%

14.62%

-4.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.46%

12.84%

-2.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.46%

12.84%

-2.38%

ELM vs. TFPN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ELM has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than TFPN's 1.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

ELM vs. TFPN - Dividend Comparison

ELM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.55%, while TFPN has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
ELM
Elm Market Navigator ETF
2.55%2.71%0.00%0.00%
TFPN
Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF
0.00%0.00%0.94%0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


ELM and TFPN have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TFPN has higher volatility (6.23%) compared to ELM (3.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ELM dropped -9.02% vs TFPN's -16.72%.

On 1-year performance, TFPN leads with 43.05% vs 17.21% for ELM. On fees, ELM is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, ELM has been the lower-risk option at 3.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TFPN has performed better with a 43.05% return vs 17.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ELM is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for TFPN.

ELM has the higher dividend yield at 2.55%, compared with 0.00% for TFPN.

ELM is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while TFPN is Global Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Elm and Tidal ETFs. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for ELM and 1.10% for TFPN.

TFPN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.96 vs 1.77), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ELM and TFPN

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