FLMFX vs. RQEIX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLMFX (Meeder Muirfield Fund) and RQEIX (RESQ Dynamic Allocation Fund) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Over the past 10 years, FLMFX returned 11.94%/yr vs 6.24%/yr for RQEIX. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLMFX charges 1.20%/yr vs 1.80%/yr for RQEIX.

Performance

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) and RESQ Dynamic Allocation Fund (RQEIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLMFX achieves a 11.42% return, which is significantly higher than RQEIX's 8.84% return. Over the past 10 years, FLMFX has outperformed RQEIX with an annualized return of 11.94%, while RQEIX has yielded a comparatively lower 6.24% annualized return.

FLMFX

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 5.10%
• YTD: 11.42%
• 6M: 12.19%
• 1Y: 27.32%
• 3Y*: 23.82%
• 5Y*: 13.71%
• 10Y*: 11.94%

RQEIX

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 4.90%
• YTD: 8.84%
• 6M: 9.12%
• 1Y: 26.92%
• 3Y*: 16.40%
• 5Y*: 4.37%
• 10Y*: 6.24%

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

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLMFX Meeder Muirfield Fund	11.42%	15.28%	36.53%	13.79%	-11.16%	20.18%	4.36%	13.52%	-3.65%	20.30%
RQEIX RESQ Dynamic Allocation Fund	8.84%	14.97%	15.35%	20.27%	-17.06%	-8.45%	14.11%	7.53%	-6.02%	11.94%

Correlation

The correlation between FLMFX and RQEIX is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2014	0.65

The correlation between FLMFX and RQEIX shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (10 years) to 0.77 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FLMFX vs. RQEIX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLMFX

FLMFX Risk / Return Rank: 62
FLMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
FLMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FLMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 57
FLMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
FLMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 69

RQEIX

RQEIX Risk / Return Rank: 95
RQEIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
RQEIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
RQEIX Omega Ratio Rank: 93
RQEIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
RQEIX Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) and RESQ Dynamic Allocation Fund (RQEIX). 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.

	FLMFX	RQEIX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	3.46	-1.12
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	5.11	-1.89
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.69	-0.27
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	7.98	-4.96
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.25	20.14	-6.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLMFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is lower than the RQEIX Sharpe Ratio of 3.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLMFX and RQEIX, 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

	FLMFX	RQEIX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	3.46	-1.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	0.26	+0.69
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85	0.39	+0.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.23	+0.41

Drawdowns

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLMFX drawdown since its inception was -42.42%, which is greater than RQEIX's maximum drawdown of -33.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLMFX and RQEIX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLMFX	RQEIX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.42%	-33.25%	-9.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.26%	-3.36%	-5.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.08%	-17.96%	+1.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.19%	-32.96%	+14.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.33%	-33.25%	+8.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.27%	-11.27%	+2.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.11%	1.33%	+0.78%

Volatility

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Volatility Comparison

Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) and RESQ Dynamic Allocation Fund (RQEIX) have volatilities of 3.30% and 3.44%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	FLMFX	RQEIX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.30%	3.44%	-0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.17%	5.33%	+3.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.97%	8.04%	+3.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.54%	16.75%	-2.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.06%	16.03%	-1.97%

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLMFX has a 1.20% expense ratio, which is lower than RQEIX's 1.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLMFX vs. RQEIX - Dividend Comparison

FLMFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, less than RQEIX's 13.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLMFX Meeder Muirfield Fund	4.90%	5.55%	31.99%	2.83%	2.76%	3.39%	0.58%	2.69%	1.50%	8.25%	0.72%	2.72%
RQEIX RESQ Dynamic Allocation Fund	13.61%	14.53%	0.38%	0.00%	0.38%	0.00%	0.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLMFX and RQEIX in my portfolio?

FLMFX and RQEIX have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLMFX or RQEIX?

RQEIX has higher volatility (3.44%) compared to FLMFX (3.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLMFX dropped -42.42% vs RQEIX's -33.25%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RQEIX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.46 vs 2.34), 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.