FDAT vs. EAOM

Last updated Jun 7, 2026

FDAT (Tactical Advantage ETF) and EAOM (iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. FDAT is actively managed, while EAOM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDAT returned 8.69%/yr vs 9.93%/yr for EAOM. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDAT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EAOM.

Performance

FDAT vs. EAOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tactical Advantage ETF (FDAT) and iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF (EAOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDAT achieves a 2.55% return, which is significantly lower than EAOM's 3.68% return.

FDAT

• 1D: -2.14%
• 1M: -0.57%
• YTD: 2.55%
• 6M: 2.78%
• 1Y: 10.52%
• 3Y*: 8.69%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EAOM

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -0.58%
• YTD: 3.68%
• 6M: 3.91%
• 1Y: 12.84%
• 3Y*: 9.93%
• 5Y*: 4.00%
• 10Y*: —

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

FDAT vs. EAOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FDAT Tactical Advantage ETF	2.55%	7.50%	9.90%	6.14%
EAOM iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF	3.68%	12.90%	7.29%	6.51%

Correlation

The correlation between FDAT and EAOM is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2023	0.75

The correlation between FDAT and EAOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDAT vs. EAOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDAT	EAOM
Financial Services	22.5%	16.6%
Industrials	21.8%	11.0%
Technology	14.9%	30.2%
Basic Materials	9.2%	2.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	9.5%
Energy	7.8%	3.8%
Real Estate	5.4%	2.3%
Healthcare	3.2%	8.6%
Utilities	2.8%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	4.4%
Communication Services	1.7%	8.3%

Return for Risk

FDAT vs. EAOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDAT

FDAT Risk / Return Rank: 35
FDAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FDAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
FDAT Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FDAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
FDAT Martin Ratio Rank: 37

EAOM

EAOM Risk / Return Rank: 61
EAOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
EAOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
EAOM Omega Ratio Rank: 65
EAOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EAOM Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

FDAT vs. EAOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tactical Advantage ETF (FDAT) and iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF (EAOM). 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.

	FDAT	EAOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.10	1.96	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	2.77	-1.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.37	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	2.51	-0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.39	11.00	-5.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FDAT vs. EAOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is lower than the EAOM Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDAT and EAOM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FDAT	EAOM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.10	1.96	-0.86
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.88	0.72	+0.16

Drawdowns

FDAT vs. EAOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDAT drawdown since its inception was -8.20%, smaller than the maximum EAOM drawdown of -20.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDAT and EAOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDAT	EAOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.20%	-20.73%	+12.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.88%	-5.17%	-0.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.20%	-7.63%	-0.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.88%	-1.78%	-1.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.25%	-4.96%	+2.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.08%	1.18%	+0.90%

Volatility

FDAT vs. EAOM - Volatility Comparison

Tactical Advantage ETF (FDAT) has a higher volatility of 4.07% compared to iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF (EAOM) at 2.59%. This indicates that FDAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EAOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDAT	EAOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.07%	2.59%	+1.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.39%	5.47%	+1.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.24%	6.62%	+3.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.58%	8.09%	+1.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.58%	7.93%	+1.65%

FDAT vs. EAOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDAT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than EAOM's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDAT vs. EAOM - Dividend Comparison

FDAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.67%, more than EAOM's 2.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EAOM iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF	2.82%	2.89%	2.89%	2.70%	1.93%	1.32%	1.02%
FDAT Tactical Advantage ETF	5.67%	4.77%	8.99%	1.58%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDAT and EAOM in my portfolio?

FDAT and EAOM have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDAT or EAOM?

FDAT has higher volatility (4.07%) compared to EAOM (2.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDAT dropped -8.20% vs EAOM's -20.73%.

Which ETF is better, FDAT or EAOM?

On 3-year performance, EAOM leads with 9.93% vs 8.69% for FDAT. On fees, EAOM is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, EAOM has been the lower-risk option at 2.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDAT or EAOM?

Over the 3-year period, EAOM has performed better with a 9.93% return vs 8.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDAT or EAOM?

EAOM is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FDAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDAT or EAOM?

FDAT has the higher dividend yield at 5.67%, compared with 2.82% for EAOM.

What is the main difference between FDAT and EAOM?

They also come from different issuers: Tactical Funds and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FDAT and 0.18% for EAOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs 1.10), 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.