LCF vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LCF (Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCF is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Touchstone, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, LCF returned 17.35%/yr vs 4.26%/yr for CAOS. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LCF charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

LCF vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCF achieves a 4.06% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.82% return.

LCF

• 1D: -1.11%
• 1M: 2.09%
• YTD: 4.06%
• 6M: 5.01%
• 1Y: 20.57%
• 3Y*: 17.35%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: 0.82%
• 6M: 0.69%
• 1Y: 1.88%
• 3Y*: 4.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LCF vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LCF Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF	4.06%	17.20%	20.71%	18.69%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.82%	2.55%	5.33%	7.97%

Correlation

The correlation between LCF and CAOS is -0.32, 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	-0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2023	0.10

The correlation between LCF and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.32 (1 year) to 0.10 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LCF vs. CAOS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LCF	CAOS
Technology	32.9%	33.1%
Communication Services	16.9%	10.4%
Financial Services	15.4%	12.4%
Healthcare	10.8%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	10.0%
Industrials	5.3%	8.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	5.4%
Energy	2.0%	4.1%
Real Estate	1.5%	2.0%
Basic Materials	0.5%	1.9%
Utilities	-	2.6%

Return for Risk

LCF vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCF

LCF Risk / Return Rank: 46
LCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
LCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
LCF Omega Ratio Rank: 50
LCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
LCF Martin Ratio Rank: 45

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 40
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS 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.

LCF vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	LCF	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.73	1.24	+0.49
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	1.98	+0.45
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.26	+0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.77	2.49	-0.72
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.32	6.22	+1.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCF vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCF Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCF and CAOS, 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

	LCF	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.73	1.24	+0.49
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.03	1.21	-0.18

Drawdowns

LCF vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCF drawdown since its inception was -18.28%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCF and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCF	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.28%	-3.60%	-14.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.67%	-0.76%	-10.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.28%	-3.60%	-14.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.53%	-1.07%	-0.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-0.90%	-1.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.82%	0.30%	+2.52%

Volatility

LCF vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) has a higher volatility of 2.69% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.26%. This indicates that LCF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCF	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.69%	0.26%	+2.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.08%	1.03%	+8.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.92%	1.52%	+10.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.47%	4.26%	+11.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.47%	4.26%	+11.21%

LCF vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCF has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCF vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

LCF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LCF Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF	0.52%	0.55%	0.63%	0.71%	0.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCF and CAOS in my portfolio?

LCF and CAOS have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCF or CAOS?

LCF has higher volatility (2.69%) compared to CAOS (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCF dropped -18.28% vs CAOS's -3.60%.

Which ETF is better, LCF or CAOS?

On 3-year performance, LCF leads with 17.35% vs 4.26% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCF or CAOS?

Over the 3-year period, LCF has performed better with a 17.35% return vs 4.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCF or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for LCF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LCF or CAOS?

LCF has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between LCF and CAOS?

LCF is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Touchstone and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for LCF and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LCF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.24), 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.