KMLM vs. CLSE
KMLM (KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF) and CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, KMLM returned -0.53%/yr vs 32.24%/yr for CLSE. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. KMLM charges 0.90%/yr vs 1.56%/yr for CLSE.
Performance
KMLM vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KMLM achieves a 10.60% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 25.32% return.
KMLM
- 1D
- 0.53%
- 1M
- -2.15%
- YTD
- 10.60%
- 6M
- 13.52%
- 1Y
- 12.84%
- 3Y*
- -0.53%
- 5Y*
- 4.37%
- 10Y*
- —
CLSE
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- 9.01%
- YTD
- 25.32%
- 6M
- 27.46%
- 1Y
- 49.70%
- 3Y*
- 32.24%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KMLM vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KMLM KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF | 10.60% | -2.98% | -1.69% | -5.66% | 19.60% |
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF | 25.32% | 20.44% | 35.54% | 17.54% | -3.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between KMLM and CLSE is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 2022 | -0.04 |
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
KMLM vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank
KMLM
CLSE
KMLM vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF (KMLM) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.
| KMLM | CLSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.13 | 3.75 | -2.62 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.59 | 5.10 | -3.51 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.66 | -0.45 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.22 | 10.48 | -8.26 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.31 | 39.08 | -31.77 |
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
| KMLM | CLSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.13 | 3.75 | -2.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.49 | 1.59 | -1.09 |
Drawdowns
KMLM vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KMLM drawdown since its inception was -27.47%, which is greater than CLSE's maximum drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KMLM and CLSE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KMLM | CLSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.47% | -16.45% | -11.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.30% | -4.85% | -1.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.28% | -16.45% | -5.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.47% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.76% | 0.00% | -13.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.74% | -3.60% | -9.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.91% | 1.30% | +0.61% |
Volatility
KMLM vs. CLSE - Volatility Comparison
KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF (KMLM) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) have volatilities of 4.49% and 4.33%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KMLM | CLSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.49% | 4.33% | +0.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.64% | 10.23% | -0.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.46% | 13.34% | -1.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.62% | 13.89% | +0.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.74% | 13.89% | +0.85% |
KMLM vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison
KMLM has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSE's 1.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
KMLM vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison
KMLM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.54%, more than CLSE's 0.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF | 0.76% | 0.95% | 0.93% | 1.21% | 0.85% | 0.00% |
KMLM KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF | 4.54% | 5.02% | 0.82% | 0.00% | 13.22% | 6.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KMLM and CLSE have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KMLM has higher volatility (4.49%) compared to CLSE (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KMLM dropped -27.47% vs CLSE's -16.45%.
On 3-year performance, CLSE leads with 32.24% vs -0.53% for KMLM. On fees, KMLM is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, CLSE has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CLSE has performed better with a 32.24% return vs -0.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KMLM is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.56% for CLSE.
KMLM has the higher dividend yield at 4.54%, compared with 0.76% for CLSE.
They also come from different issuers: CICC and Convergence Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for KMLM and 1.56% for CLSE.
CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.75 vs 1.13), 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 KMLM and CLSE
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