PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GHTA vs. RULE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GHTA vs. RULE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goose Hollow Tactical Allocation ETF (GHTA) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GHTA achieves a 2.24% return, which is significantly lower than RULE's 44.19% return.


GHTA

1D
0.27%
1M
0.13%
YTD
2.24%
6M
1.10%
1Y
6.74%
3Y*
9.35%
5Y*
10Y*

RULE

1D
-0.83%
1M
17.17%
YTD
44.19%
6M
45.23%
1Y
51.11%
3Y*
20.04%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GHTA vs. RULE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GHTA
Goose Hollow Tactical Allocation ETF
2.24%10.06%4.78%14.10%1.99%-0.78%
RULE
Adaptive Core ETF
44.19%4.60%7.59%6.29%-22.87%-0.28%

Correlation

The correlation between GHTA and RULE is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.39

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2021

0.37

GHTA vs. RULE - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GHTA
RULE

Technology

25.8%
54.4%

Industrials

21.2%
13.2%

Financial Services

9.9%
5.7%

Real Estate

9.0%
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
3.2%

Utilities

6.7%
0.0%

Basic Materials

5.1%
9.0%

Energy

4.5%
2.4%

Healthcare

4.4%
6.4%

Communication Services

4.3%
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

1.3%
0.8%

Technology

GHTA
25.8%
RULE
54.4%

Industrials

GHTA
21.2%
RULE
13.2%

Financial Services

GHTA
9.9%
RULE
5.7%

Real Estate

GHTA
9.0%
RULE
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

GHTA
7.9%
RULE
3.2%

Utilities

GHTA
6.7%
RULE
0.0%

Basic Materials

GHTA
5.1%
RULE
9.0%

Energy

GHTA
4.5%
RULE
2.4%

Healthcare

GHTA
4.4%
RULE
6.4%

Communication Services

GHTA
4.3%
RULE
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

GHTA
1.3%
RULE
0.8%

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

GHTA vs. RULE — Risk / Return Rank

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

GHTA
GHTA Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
GHTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GHTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
GHTA Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
GHTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
GHTA Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

RULE
RULE Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
RULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
RULE Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
RULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
RULE Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GHTA vs. RULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goose Hollow Tactical Allocation ETF (GHTA) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). 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.


GHTARULEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.45

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.09

4.06

-2.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.71

16.58

-13.87

GHTA vs. RULE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GHTA Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the RULE Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GHTA and RULE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GHTARULEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

2.53

-1.70

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.45

+0.14

Drawdowns

GHTA vs. RULE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GHTA drawdown since its inception was -13.92%, smaller than the maximum RULE drawdown of -30.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GHTA and RULE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GHTARULEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.92%

-30.48%

+16.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.18%

-12.65%

+6.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.91%

-20.21%

+6.30%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.63%

-0.83%

-1.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.51%

-14.96%

+11.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.49%

3.09%

-0.60%

Volatility

GHTA vs. RULE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goose Hollow Tactical Allocation ETF (GHTA) is 1.90%, while Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a volatility of 9.51%. This indicates that GHTA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RULE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GHTARULEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.90%

9.51%

-7.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.69%

17.58%

-11.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.11%

20.28%

-12.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.94%

14.83%

-2.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.94%

14.83%

-2.89%

GHTA vs. RULE - Expense Ratio Comparison

GHTA has a 1.21% expense ratio, which is higher than RULE's 1.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

GHTA vs. RULE - Dividend Comparison

GHTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.75%, while RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
GHTA
Goose Hollow Tactical Allocation ETF
3.75%3.84%2.46%2.32%0.38%0.41%
RULE
Adaptive Core ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%2.01%0.01%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GHTA and RULE have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RULE has higher volatility (9.51%) compared to GHTA (1.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GHTA dropped -13.92% vs RULE's -30.48%.

On 3-year performance, RULE leads with 20.04% vs 9.35% for GHTA. On fees, RULE is cheaper at 1.10% per year. On volatility, GHTA has been the lower-risk option at 1.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, RULE has performed better with a 20.04% return vs 9.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RULE is cheaper with a 1.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.21% for GHTA.

GHTA has the higher dividend yield at 3.75%, compared with 0.00% for RULE.

They also come from different issuers: Goose Hollow and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 1.21% for GHTA and 1.10% for RULE.

RULE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 0.83), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GHTA and RULE

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