LALT vs. CLSE

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

LALT (First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF) and CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LALT is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by First Trust, while CLSE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, LALT returned 10.27%/yr vs 31.32%/yr for CLSE. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LALT charges 1.94%/yr vs 1.56%/yr for CLSE.

Performance

LALT vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF (LALT) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LALT achieves a 9.60% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 23.02% return.

LALT

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: -0.95%
• YTD: 9.60%
• 6M: 9.66%
• 1Y: 20.41%
• 3Y*: 10.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSE

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 1.85%
• YTD: 23.02%
• 6M: 24.70%
• 1Y: 47.52%
• 3Y*: 31.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LALT vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LALT First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF	9.60%	10.79%	8.77%	0.88%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	23.02%	20.44%	35.54%	18.90%

Correlation

The correlation between LALT and CLSE is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2023	0.28

LALT vs. CLSE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LALT	CLSE
Financial Services	31.4%	-3.3%
Technology	22.1%	36.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	6.3%
Industrials	7.7%	2.1%
Healthcare	7.3%	6.1%
Energy	5.8%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	0.6%
Communication Services	5.2%	6.2%
Basic Materials	4.4%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.5%	1.6%
Utilities	1.2%	1.7%

Return for Risk

LALT vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

LALT

LALT Risk / Return Rank: 93
LALT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
LALT Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
LALT Omega Ratio Rank: 92
LALT Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
LALT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 96
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

LALT vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF (LALT) 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.

	LALT	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.95	3.54	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.11	4.76	-0.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.62	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.15	9.85	-2.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	27.08	36.64	-9.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LALT vs. CLSE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LALT Sharpe Ratio is 2.95, which is comparable to the CLSE Sharpe Ratio of 3.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LALT and CLSE, 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

	LALT	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.95	3.54	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.55	1.54	+0.01

Drawdowns

LALT vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LALT drawdown since its inception was -6.97%, smaller than the maximum CLSE drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LALT and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	LALT	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.97%	-16.45%	+9.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.87%	-4.85%	+1.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.97%	-16.45%	+9.48%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.79%	-2.18%	+0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.98%	-3.59%	+2.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.76%	1.31%	-0.55%

Volatility

LALT vs. CLSE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF (LALT) is 1.81%, while Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) has a volatility of 4.28%. This indicates that LALT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LALT	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.81%	4.28%	-2.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.57%	10.46%	-4.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.96%	13.52%	-6.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.81%	13.91%	-8.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.81%	13.91%	-8.10%

LALT vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

LALT has a 1.94% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSE's 1.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

LALT vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

LALT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.72%, more than CLSE's 0.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.77%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%
LALT First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF	3.72%	2.03%	2.06%	2.44%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LALT and CLSE in my portfolio?

LALT and CLSE have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LALT or CLSE?

CLSE has higher volatility (4.28%) compared to LALT (1.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LALT dropped -6.97% vs CLSE's -16.45%.

Which ETF is better, LALT or CLSE?

On 3-year performance, CLSE leads with 31.32% vs 10.27% for LALT. On fees, CLSE is cheaper at 1.56% per year. On volatility, LALT has been the lower-risk option at 1.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LALT or CLSE?

Over the 3-year period, CLSE has performed better with a 31.32% return vs 10.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LALT or CLSE?

CLSE is cheaper with a 1.56% expense ratio, compared with 1.94% for LALT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LALT or CLSE?

LALT has the higher dividend yield at 3.72%, compared with 0.77% for CLSE.

What is the main difference between LALT and CLSE?

LALT is categorized as Global Allocation, while CLSE is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Convergence Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 1.94% for LALT and 1.56% for CLSE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.54 vs 2.95), 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.