INCM vs. TUGN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

INCM (Franklin Income Focus ETF) and TUGN (STF Tactical Growth & Income ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, INCM returned 10.76%/yr vs 20.91%/yr for TUGN. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INCM charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for TUGN.

Performance

INCM vs. TUGN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) and STF Tactical Growth & Income ETF (TUGN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INCM achieves a 6.27% return, which is significantly lower than TUGN's 15.79% return.

INCM

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -0.39%
• YTD: 6.27%
• 6M: 6.27%
• 1Y: 13.86%
• 3Y*: 10.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TUGN

• 1D: -1.93%
• 1M: 0.55%
• YTD: 15.79%
• 6M: 14.77%
• 1Y: 31.29%
• 3Y*: 20.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INCM vs. TUGN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF	6.27%	13.07%	6.80%	5.76%
TUGN STF Tactical Growth & Income ETF	15.79%	19.11%	18.44%	10.83%

Correlation

The correlation between INCM and TUGN is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2023	0.45

Return for Risk

INCM vs. TUGN — Risk / Return Rank

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

INCM

INCM Risk / Return Rank: 85
INCM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
INCM Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
INCM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
INCM Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
INCM Martin Ratio Rank: 87

TUGN

TUGN Risk / Return Rank: 55
TUGN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
TUGN Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
TUGN Omega Ratio Rank: 59
TUGN Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
TUGN Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

INCM vs. TUGN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) and STF Tactical Growth & Income ETF (TUGN). 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.

	INCM	TUGN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	1.87	+0.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.60	2.48	+1.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.34	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.36	2.43	+1.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.05	8.24	+9.81

INCM vs. TUGN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INCM Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is higher than the TUGN Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INCM and TUGN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

INCM vs. TUGN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INCM drawdown since its inception was -7.84%, smaller than the maximum TUGN drawdown of -23.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INCM and TUGN.

Drawdown Indicators

	INCM	TUGN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.84%	-23.45%	+15.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.19%	-12.96%	+9.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.84%	-21.60%	+13.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-3.27%	+2.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.08%	-6.38%	+5.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.77%	3.80%	-3.03%

Volatility

INCM vs. TUGN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) is 2.44%, while STF Tactical Growth & Income ETF (TUGN) has a volatility of 8.01%. This indicates that INCM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TUGN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INCM	TUGN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.44%	8.01%	-5.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.29%	13.65%	-9.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.58%	16.81%	-11.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.28%	17.32%	-10.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.28%	17.32%	-10.04%

INCM vs. TUGN - Expense Ratio Comparison

INCM has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than TUGN's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

INCM vs. TUGN - Dividend Comparison

INCM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.09%, less than TUGN's 10.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF	5.09%	4.96%	5.06%	3.01%	0.00%
TUGN STF Tactical Growth & Income ETF	10.82%	11.50%	11.84%	10.83%	7.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INCM and TUGN in my portfolio?

INCM and TUGN have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, INCM or TUGN?

TUGN has higher volatility (8.01%) compared to INCM (2.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INCM dropped -7.84% vs TUGN's -23.45%.

Which ETF is better, INCM or TUGN?

On 3-year performance, TUGN leads with 20.91% vs 10.76% for INCM. On fees, INCM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, INCM has been the lower-risk option at 2.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INCM or TUGN?

Over the 3-year period, TUGN has performed better with a 20.91% return vs 10.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INCM or TUGN?

INCM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for TUGN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INCM or TUGN?

TUGN has the higher dividend yield at 10.82%, compared with 5.09% for INCM.

What is the main difference between INCM and TUGN?

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and STF. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for INCM and 0.65% for TUGN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INCM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.87), 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.