PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IAT vs. CAOS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IAT vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IAT achieves a 16.55% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.76% return.


IAT

1D
0.05%
1M
1.29%
6M
10.79%
YTD
16.55%
1Y
33.38%
3Y*
22.18%
5Y*
5.94%
10Y*
9.76%
ALL TIME*
3.78%

CAOS

1D
-0.06%
1M
-0.01%
6M
0.16%
YTD
0.76%
1Y
1.73%
3Y*
3.48%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
4.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$6.81M$5.39M$5.09M
$7.75M$9.87M$9.53M

IAT vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IAT
iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF
16.55%13.05%24.36%-12.88%
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.76%2.55%5.33%7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between IAT and CAOS is -0.24, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.24

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023

0.01

The correlation between IAT and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

IAT vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IAT
IAT Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
IAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
IAT Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
IAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
IAT Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

CAOS
CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IAT vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.


IATCAOSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.24

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.75

2.47

-0.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.51

5.45

-0.93

IAT vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is comparable to the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IAT and CAOS, 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...

Drawdowns

IAT vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IAT drawdown since its inception was -77.22%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAT and CAOS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IATCAOSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.22%

-3.89%

-73.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.49%

-0.76%

-16.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.29%

-3.60%

-25.69%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.55%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-55.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.53%

-1.13%

-1.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.77%

-0.92%

-25.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.77%

0.34%

+6.43%

Volatility

IAT vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT) has a higher volatility of 5.49% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. This indicates that IAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IATCAOSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.49%

0.51%

+4.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.01%

1.07%

+14.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.95%

1.57%

+20.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.76%

4.18%

+24.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.67%

4.18%

+26.49%

IAT vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IAT has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.


Dividends

IAT vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

IAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IAT
iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF
2.54%2.94%2.95%3.56%3.12%1.88%2.87%2.49%2.48%1.55%1.52%1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions


IAT and CAOS have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IAT has higher volatility (5.49%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IAT dropped -77.22% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

On 3-year performance, IAT leads with 22.18% vs 3.48% for CAOS. On fees, IAT is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, IAT has performed better with a 22.18% return vs 3.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IAT is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

IAT has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

IAT is categorized as Financials Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for IAT and 0.63% for CAOS.

IAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 1.19), 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 IAT and CAOS

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