FNX vs. RUNN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FNX (First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund) and RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. FNX is passively managed, while RUNN is actively managed. Over the past year, FNX returned 27.83% vs -0.93% for RUNN. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNX charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RUNN.

Performance

FNX vs. RUNN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund (FNX) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNX achieves a 12.62% return, which is significantly higher than RUNN's -2.05% return.

FNX

• 1D: 0.72%
• 1M: 1.59%
• YTD: 12.62%
• 6M: 12.05%
• 1Y: 27.83%
• 3Y*: 17.56%
• 5Y*: 8.47%
• 10Y*: 11.88%

RUNN

• 1D: 0.98%
• 1M: -0.71%
• YTD: -2.05%
• 6M: -2.63%
• 1Y: -0.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FNX vs. RUNN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FNX First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund	12.62%	9.87%	12.21%	12.79%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	-2.05%	2.30%	17.16%	12.05%

Correlation

The correlation between FNX and RUNN 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023	0.82

The correlation between FNX and RUNN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNX vs. RUNN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNX	RUNN
Industrials	19.3%	39.4%
Financial Services	18.6%	12.8%
Consumer Cyclical	14.4%	8.3%
Healthcare	10.4%	13.3%
Technology	9.5%	17.8%
Real Estate	8.6%	-
Energy	6.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	-
Basic Materials	3.1%	2.0%
Utilities	2.7%	-
Communication Services	2.2%	2.1%

Return for Risk

FNX vs. RUNN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNX

FNX Risk / Return Rank: 55
FNX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
FNX Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
FNX Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FNX Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
FNX Martin Ratio Rank: 59

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 8
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

FNX vs. RUNN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund (FNX) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). 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.

	FNX	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	-0.07	+1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	-0.01	+2.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.00	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.03	-0.09	+3.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.42	-0.21	+10.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FNX vs. RUNN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNX Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is higher than the RUNN Sharpe Ratio of -0.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNX and RUNN, 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

	FNX	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.74	-0.07	+1.81
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.70	-0.28

Drawdowns

FNX vs. RUNN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNX drawdown since its inception was -57.11%, which is greater than RUNN's maximum drawdown of -16.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNX and RUNN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNX	RUNN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.11%	-16.83%	-40.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.24%	-10.34%	+1.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.97%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.97%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	-6.99%	+6.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.40%	-3.54%	-4.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.68%	4.36%	-1.68%

Volatility

FNX vs. RUNN - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund (FNX) has a higher volatility of 4.33% compared to Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) at 3.69%. This indicates that FNX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RUNN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNX	RUNN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.33%	3.69%	+0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.43%	9.75%	+1.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.08%	12.87%	+3.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.49%	13.81%	+6.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.96%	13.81%	+8.15%

FNX vs. RUNN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNX has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RUNN's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNX vs. RUNN - Dividend Comparison

FNX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, more than RUNN's 0.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNX First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund	0.82%	0.88%	1.26%	1.11%	1.19%	0.94%	1.04%	1.21%	1.01%	0.90%	1.07%	1.07%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.57%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNX and RUNN in my portfolio?

FNX and RUNN 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, FNX or RUNN?

FNX has higher volatility (4.33%) compared to RUNN (3.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNX dropped -57.11% vs RUNN's -16.83%.

Which ETF is better, FNX or RUNN?

On 1-year performance, FNX leads with 27.83% vs -0.93% for RUNN. On fees, RUNN is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNX or RUNN?

Over the 1-year period, FNX has performed better with a 27.83% return vs -0.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNX or RUNN?

RUNN is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FNX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNX or RUNN?

FNX has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.57% for RUNN.

What is the main difference between FNX and RUNN?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Running Oak Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FNX and 0.58% for RUNN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs -0.07), 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.