KONG vs. RSBY

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KONG (Formidable Fortress ETF) and RSBY (Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KONG is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund actively managed by Formidable Asset Management, while RSBY is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Return Stacked. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, KONG returned 7.33% vs 20.50% for RSBY. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. KONG charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.98%/yr for RSBY.

Performance

KONG vs. RSBY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) and Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KONG achieves a 2.62% return, which is significantly lower than RSBY's 18.98% return.

KONG

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 1.91%
• YTD: 2.62%
• 6M: 3.53%
• 1Y: 7.33%
• 3Y*: 9.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RSBY

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -2.54%
• YTD: 18.98%
• 6M: 14.31%
• 1Y: 20.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KONG vs. RSBY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KONG Formidable Fortress ETF	2.62%	6.56%	3.42%
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	18.98%	-12.98%	-7.90%

Correlation

The correlation between KONG and RSBY is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2024	-0.13

KONG vs. RSBY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KONG	RSBY
Technology	33.1%	53.7%
Industrials	15.7%	3.1%
Healthcare	13.3%	4.2%
Financial Services	9.3%	0.2%
Communication Services	7.7%	15.8%
Real Estate	6.1%	0.1%
Energy	5.0%	0.6%
Basic Materials	3.6%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	7.7%
Consumer Cyclical	2.9%	12.2%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

KONG vs. RSBY — Risk / Return Rank

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

KONG

KONG Risk / Return Rank: 21
KONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
KONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
KONG Omega Ratio Rank: 19
KONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
KONG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

RSBY

RSBY Risk / Return Rank: 49
RSBY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
RSBY Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
RSBY Omega Ratio Rank: 48
RSBY Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
RSBY Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

KONG vs. RSBY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) and Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY). 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.

	KONG	RSBY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.68	1.75	-1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.02	2.54	-1.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.30	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.86	2.59	-1.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.46	6.07	-2.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KONG vs. RSBY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KONG Sharpe Ratio is 0.68, which is lower than the RSBY Sharpe Ratio of 1.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KONG and RSBY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KONG	RSBY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68	1.75	-1.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	-0.20	+0.56

Drawdowns

KONG vs. RSBY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KONG drawdown since its inception was -19.98%, smaller than the maximum RSBY drawdown of -23.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KONG and RSBY.

Drawdown Indicators

	KONG	RSBY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.98%	-23.32%	+3.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.54%	-7.95%	-0.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.48%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.91%	-6.09%	+5.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.81%	-13.79%	+7.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	3.39%	-1.27%

Volatility

KONG vs. RSBY - Volatility Comparison

Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) has a higher volatility of 2.26% compared to Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY) at 2.11%. This indicates that KONG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSBY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KONG	RSBY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.26%	2.11%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.52%	8.52%	0.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.84%	11.80%	-0.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.59%	13.56%	+1.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.59%	13.56%	+1.03%

KONG vs. RSBY - Expense Ratio Comparison

KONG has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than RSBY's 0.98% expense ratio.

Dividends

KONG vs. RSBY - Dividend Comparison

KONG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than RSBY's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
KONG Formidable Fortress ETF	0.36%	0.37%	0.78%	0.69%	0.49%	0.12%
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	1.74%	2.07%	2.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KONG and RSBY in my portfolio?

KONG and RSBY have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KONG or RSBY?

KONG has higher volatility (2.26%) compared to RSBY (2.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KONG dropped -19.98% vs RSBY's -23.32%.

Which ETF is better, KONG or RSBY?

On 1-year performance, RSBY leads with 20.50% vs 7.33% for KONG. On fees, KONG is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, RSBY has been the lower-risk option at 2.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KONG or RSBY?

Over the 1-year period, RSBY has performed better with a 20.50% return vs 7.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KONG or RSBY?

KONG is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for RSBY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KONG or RSBY?

RSBY has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.36% for KONG.

What is the main difference between KONG and RSBY?

KONG is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while RSBY is Multistrategy. They also come from different issuers: Formidable Asset Management and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for KONG and 0.98% for RSBY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSBY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 0.68), 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.