INCM vs. RULE
INCM (Franklin Income Focus ETF) and RULE (Adaptive Core ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, INCM returned 16.64% vs 51.95% for RULE. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. INCM charges 0.38%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for RULE.
Performance
INCM vs. RULE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INCM achieves a 6.96% return, which is significantly lower than RULE's 44.43% return.
INCM
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.53%
- YTD
- 6.96%
- 6M
- 7.85%
- 1Y
- 16.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RULE
- 1D
- 2.91%
- 1M
- 20.61%
- YTD
- 44.43%
- 6M
- 45.11%
- 1Y
- 51.95%
- 3Y*
- 20.12%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INCM vs. RULE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF | 6.96% | 13.07% | 6.80% | 5.76% |
RULE Adaptive Core ETF | 44.43% | 4.60% | 7.59% | 6.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between INCM and RULE is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023 | 0.55 |
The correlation between INCM and RULE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
INCM vs. RULE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
INCM
RULE
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Energy
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Financial Services
INCM
RULE
Consumer Defensive
INCM
RULE
Utilities
INCM
RULE
Energy
INCM
RULE
Healthcare
INCM
RULE
Technology
INCM
RULE
Industrials
INCM
RULE
Basic Materials
INCM
RULE
Communication Services
INCM
RULE
Consumer Cyclical
INCM
RULE
Real Estate
INCM
RULE
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
INCM vs. RULE — Risk / Return Rank
INCM
RULE
INCM vs. RULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) 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.
| INCM | RULE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.20 | 2.58 | +0.62 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.78 | 3.46 | +1.32 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.62 | 1.45 | +0.16 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.27 | 4.13 | +1.14 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.29 | 16.91 | +5.37 |
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
| INCM | RULE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.20 | 2.58 | +0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.54 | 0.46 | +1.08 |
Drawdowns
INCM vs. RULE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INCM drawdown since its inception was -7.84%, smaller than the maximum RULE drawdown of -30.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INCM and RULE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INCM | RULE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.84% | -30.48% | +22.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.19% | -12.65% | +9.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.21% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.27% | 0.00% | -0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.09% | -14.99% | +13.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.75% | 3.09% | -2.34% |
Volatility
INCM vs. RULE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) is 1.72%, while Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a volatility of 9.65%. This indicates that INCM 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
| INCM | RULE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.72% | 9.65% | -7.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.81% | 17.55% | -13.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.22% | 20.25% | -15.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.23% | 14.83% | -7.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.23% | 14.83% | -7.60% |
INCM vs. RULE - Expense Ratio Comparison
INCM has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than RULE's 1.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
INCM vs. RULE - Dividend Comparison
INCM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.06%, while RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF | 5.06% | 4.96% | 5.06% | 3.01% | 0.00% |
RULE Adaptive Core ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 2.01% | 0.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
INCM and RULE have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RULE has higher volatility (9.65%) compared to INCM (1.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INCM dropped -7.84% vs RULE's -30.48%.
On 1-year performance, RULE leads with 51.95% vs 16.64% for INCM. On fees, INCM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, INCM has been the lower-risk option at 1.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RULE has performed better with a 51.95% return vs 16.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
INCM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for RULE.
INCM has the higher dividend yield at 5.06%, compared with 0.00% for RULE.
They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for INCM and 1.10% for RULE.
INCM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.20 vs 2.58), 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 INCM 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