HIPS vs. CEFS
HIPS (GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF) and CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HIPS is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the TFMS HIPS Index, while CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. HIPS is passively managed, while CEFS is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, HIPS returned 3.96%/yr vs 13.85%/yr for CEFS. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HIPS charges 3.19%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for CEFS.
Performance
HIPS vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HIPS achieves a 3.28% return, which is significantly lower than CEFS's 13.75% return.
HIPS
- 1D
- -0.79%
- 1M
- -3.49%
- YTD
- 3.28%
- 6M
- 2.30%
- 1Y
- 6.18%
- 3Y*
- 10.94%
- 5Y*
- 3.96%
- 10Y*
- 5.55%
CEFS
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 4.35%
- YTD
- 13.75%
- 6M
- 15.64%
- 1Y
- 25.00%
- 3Y*
- 22.04%
- 5Y*
- 13.85%
- 10Y*
- —
HIPS vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HIPS GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF | 3.28% | 1.00% | 13.71% | 16.09% | -13.47% | 22.65% | -11.74% | 22.94% | -9.30% | 1.47% |
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF | 13.75% | 16.67% | 23.48% | 20.99% | -7.08% | 17.86% | 3.40% | 28.41% | -9.97% | 7.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between HIPS and CEFS is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2017 | 0.49 |
The correlation between HIPS and CEFS shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (1 year) to 0.55 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
HIPS vs. CEFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HIPS
CEFS
Energy
Real Estate
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
HIPS
CEFS
Real Estate
HIPS
CEFS
Financial Services
HIPS
CEFS
Basic Materials
HIPS
CEFS
Communication Services
HIPS
CEFS
Consumer Cyclical
HIPS
-
CEFS
Consumer Defensive
HIPS
-
CEFS
Healthcare
HIPS
-
CEFS
Industrials
HIPS
-
CEFS
Technology
HIPS
-
CEFS
Utilities
HIPS
-
CEFS
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
HIPS vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank
HIPS
CEFS
HIPS vs. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF (HIPS) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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.
| HIPS | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.65 | 2.53 | -1.88 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.97 | 3.71 | -2.74 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.48 | -0.36 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.01 | 4.43 | -3.42 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.70 | 17.26 | -14.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HIPS | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.65 | 2.53 | -1.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 | 1.06 | -0.76 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.31 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.23 | 0.79 | -0.57 |
Drawdowns
HIPS vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HIPS drawdown since its inception was -53.14%, which is greater than CEFS's maximum drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HIPS and CEFS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HIPS | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.14% | -38.99% | -14.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.15% | -5.67% | -0.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.41% | -13.37% | -2.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.28% | -16.85% | -4.43% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -53.14% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.23% | -0.51% | -3.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.39% | -3.67% | -3.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.29% | 1.45% | +0.84% |
Volatility
HIPS vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF (HIPS) is 1.77%, while Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) has a volatility of 3.37%. This indicates that HIPS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HIPS | CEFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.77% | 3.37% | -1.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.05% | 8.56% | -1.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.57% | 9.95% | -0.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.29% | 13.08% | +0.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.07% | 15.33% | +2.74% |
HIPS vs. CEFS - Expense Ratio Comparison
HIPS has a 3.19% expense ratio, which is higher than CEFS's 1.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
HIPS vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison
HIPS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.19%, more than CEFS's 7.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF | 7.10% | 7.84% | 8.79% | 9.20% | 11.32% | 10.73% | 8.61% | 8.10% | 10.43% | 5.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HIPS GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF | 11.19% | 11.04% | 10.04% | 10.32% | 10.76% | 8.43% | 9.50% | 6.93% | 8.66% | 7.28% | 7.20% | 8.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HIPS and CEFS have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CEFS has higher volatility (3.37%) compared to HIPS (1.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HIPS dropped -53.14% vs CEFS's -38.99%.
On 5-year performance, CEFS leads with 13.85% vs 3.96% for HIPS. On fees, CEFS is cheaper at 1.29% per year. On volatility, HIPS has been the lower-risk option at 1.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CEFS has performed better with a 13.85% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CEFS is cheaper with a 1.29% expense ratio, compared with 3.19% for HIPS.
HIPS has the higher dividend yield at 11.19%, compared with 7.10% for CEFS.
HIPS is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CEFS is Event Driven. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 3.19% for HIPS and 1.29% for CEFS.
CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 0.65), 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.
Find the right allocation for HIPS and CEFS
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