ELM vs. XRLX
ELM (Elm Market Navigator ETF) and XRLX (FundX Conservative ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ELM returned 19.20% vs 17.55% for XRLX. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ELM charges 0.24%/yr vs 1.63%/yr for XRLX.
Performance
ELM vs. XRLX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ELM having a 7.63% return and XRLX slightly higher at 7.78%.
ELM
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 2.16%
- YTD
- 7.63%
- 6M
- 8.49%
- 1Y
- 19.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XRLX
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 3.65%
- YTD
- 7.78%
- 6M
- 8.03%
- 1Y
- 17.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ELM vs. XRLX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF | 7.63% | 11.89% |
XRLX FundX Conservative ETF | 7.78% | 5.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between ELM and XRLX 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2025 | 0.86 |
The correlation between ELM and XRLX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
ELM vs. XRLX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ELM
XRLX
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Technology
ELM
XRLX
Financial Services
ELM
XRLX
Industrials
ELM
XRLX
Consumer Cyclical
ELM
XRLX
Healthcare
ELM
XRLX
Communication Services
ELM
XRLX
Basic Materials
ELM
XRLX
Consumer Defensive
ELM
XRLX
Energy
ELM
XRLX
Real Estate
ELM
XRLX
Utilities
ELM
XRLX
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. XRLX — Risk / Return Rank
ELM
XRLX
ELM vs. XRLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) and FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX). 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.
| ELM | XRLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.40 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.57 | 2.81 | -0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.64 | 12.67 | -2.03 |
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
| ELM | XRLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.06 | 2.18 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.49 | 1.41 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
ELM vs. XRLX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ELM drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, smaller than the maximum XRLX drawdown of -15.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ELM and XRLX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ELM | XRLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.02% | -15.33% | +6.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.52% | -6.28% | -1.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.51% | -0.54% | +0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.32% | -1.70% | +0.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.81% | 1.39% | +0.42% |
Volatility
ELM vs. XRLX - Volatility Comparison
Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) and FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) have volatilities of 2.51% and 2.55%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ELM | XRLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.51% | 2.55% | -0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.51% | 6.64% | +0.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.36% | 8.10% | +1.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.26% | 11.04% | -0.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.26% | 11.04% | -0.78% |
ELM vs. XRLX - Expense Ratio Comparison
ELM has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than XRLX's 1.63% expense ratio.
Dividends
ELM vs. XRLX - Dividend Comparison
ELM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, less than XRLX's 2.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF | 2.52% | 2.71% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XRLX FundX Conservative ETF | 2.57% | 2.77% | 1.66% | 1.68% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ELM and XRLX 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.
XRLX has higher volatility (2.55%) compared to ELM (2.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ELM dropped -9.02% vs XRLX's -15.33%.
On 1-year performance, ELM leads with 19.20% vs 17.55% for XRLX. On fees, ELM is cheaper at 0.24% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ELM has performed better with a 19.20% return vs 17.55%. 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 1.63% for XRLX.
XRLX has the higher dividend yield at 2.57%, compared with 2.52% for ELM.
They also come from different issuers: Elm and FundX. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for ELM and 1.63% for XRLX.
XRLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 2.06), 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 ELM and XRLX
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