PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LSAF vs. RUNN
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

LSAF vs. RUNN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

LSAF vs. RUNN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
LSAF
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF
1.81%12.01%18.09%13.69%
RUNN
Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF
-3.39%2.30%17.16%12.05%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LSAF achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly higher than RUNN's -3.39% return.


LSAF

1D
2.31%
1M
-3.24%
YTD
1.81%
6M
3.31%
1Y
16.99%
3Y*
15.43%
5Y*
8.67%
10Y*

RUNN

1D
2.05%
1M
-6.61%
YTD
-3.39%
6M
-5.49%
1Y
-0.13%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


LSAF vs. RUNN - Expense Ratio Comparison

LSAF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than RUNN's 0.58% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

LSAF vs. RUNN — Risk / Return Rank

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

LSAF
LSAF Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
LSAF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LSAF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LSAF Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
LSAF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
LSAF Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

RUNN
RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LSAF vs. RUNN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). 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.


LSAFRUNNDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.87

-0.01

+0.88

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.38

0.11

+1.28

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.01

+0.17

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.36

0.05

+1.31

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

6.16

0.15

+6.01

LSAF vs. RUNN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LSAF Sharpe Ratio is 0.87, which is higher than the RUNN Sharpe Ratio of -0.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LSAF and RUNN, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LSAFRUNNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.87

-0.01

+0.88

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.70

-0.29

Correlation

The correlation between LSAF and RUNN is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

LSAF vs. RUNN - Dividend Comparison

LSAF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, more than RUNN's 0.57% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018
LSAF
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF
0.67%0.69%0.42%0.84%0.96%0.37%0.53%0.71%0.20%
RUNN
Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF
0.57%0.55%0.39%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

LSAF vs. RUNN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LSAF drawdown since its inception was -41.67%, which is greater than RUNN's maximum drawdown of -16.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSAF and RUNN.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


LSAFRUNNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.67%

-16.83%

-24.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.96%

-10.60%

-2.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.42%

-8.26%

+3.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.45%

-3.35%

-3.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.86%

3.79%

-0.93%

Volatility

LSAF vs. RUNN - Volatility Comparison

LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) has a higher volatility of 5.02% compared to Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) at 4.34%. This indicates that LSAF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RUNN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


LSAFRUNNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.02%

4.34%

+0.68%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.01%

9.86%

+1.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.56%

16.68%

+2.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.38%

13.88%

+4.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.04%

13.88%

+8.16%