FICO vs. CLSE

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

FICO (Fair Isaac Corporation) is a stock, while CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) is Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners. Over the past 3 years, FICO returned 14.02%/yr vs 29.19%/yr for CLSE. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

FICO vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FICO achieves a -26.58% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 23.64% return.

FICO

• 1D: 2.94%
• 1M: 4.63%
• 6M: -21.50%
• YTD: -26.58%
• 1Y: -19.23%
• 3Y*: 14.02%
• 5Y*: 18.83%
• 10Y*: 26.71%

CLSE

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: -1.26%
• 6M: 21.59%
• YTD: 23.64%
• 1Y: 45.61%
• 3Y*: 29.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FICO vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FICO Fair Isaac Corporation	-26.58%	-15.08%	71.04%	94.46%	20.15%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	23.64%	20.44%	35.54%	17.54%	-4.38%

Correlation

The correlation between FICO and CLSE is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2022	0.33

The correlation between FICO and CLSE shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.33 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FICO vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

FICO

FICO Risk / Return Rank: 29
FICO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FICO Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
FICO Omega Ratio Rank: 28
FICO Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
FICO Martin Ratio Rank: 30

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 96
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

FICO vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.

	FICO	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.38	3.34	-3.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.24	4.48	-4.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.57	-0.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.38	9.45	-9.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.73	33.01	-33.75

FICO vs. CLSE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FICO Sharpe Ratio is -0.38, which is lower than the CLSE Sharpe Ratio of 3.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FICO and CLSE, 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

FICO vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FICO drawdown since its inception was -79.26%, which is greater than CLSE's maximum drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FICO and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	FICO	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.26%	-16.45%	-62.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-50.93%	-4.85%	-46.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-61.28%	-16.45%	-44.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.28%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.28%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-47.90%	-1.92%	-45.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.11%	-3.54%	-14.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	26.25%	1.39%	+24.86%

Volatility

FICO vs. CLSE - Volatility Comparison

Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) has a higher volatility of 12.45% compared to Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) at 3.41%. This indicates that FICO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FICO	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.45%	3.41%	+9.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.99%	10.78%	+29.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.23%	13.74%	+36.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	41.05%	13.89%	+27.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.20%	13.89%	+24.31%

Dividends

FICO vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

FICO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CLSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.77%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FICO Fair Isaac Corporation	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.07%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FICO and CLSE in my portfolio?

FICO and CLSE have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FICO or CLSE?

FICO has higher volatility (12.45%) compared to CLSE (3.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FICO dropped -79.26% vs CLSE's -16.45%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.34 vs -0.38), 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.