MBS vs. CFIT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MBS (Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF) and CFIT (Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MBS returned 6.88% vs 12.64% for CFIT. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MBS charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for CFIT.

Performance

MBS vs. CFIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) and Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MBS achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly lower than CFIT's 5.79% return.

MBS

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: -0.22%
• YTD: 0.62%
• 6M: 0.84%
• 1Y: 6.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CFIT

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 5.79%
• 6M: 5.60%
• 1Y: 12.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MBS vs. CFIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF	0.62%	5.68%
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	5.79%	3.59%

Correlation

The correlation between MBS and CFIT is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2025	0.37

Return for Risk

MBS vs. CFIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MBS

MBS Risk / Return Rank: 69
MBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
MBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
MBS Omega Ratio Rank: 75
MBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
MBS Martin Ratio Rank: 57

CFIT

CFIT Risk / Return Rank: 68
CFIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
CFIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
CFIT Omega Ratio Rank: 75
CFIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CFIT Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

MBS vs. CFIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) and Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT). 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.

	MBS	CFIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	2.31	+0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.54	3.25	+0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.44	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.14	3.00	+0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.89	11.31	-1.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MBS vs. CFIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MBS Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the CFIT Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MBS and CFIT, 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

	MBS	CFIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.36	2.31	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.60	1.49	+0.11

Drawdowns

MBS vs. CFIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBS drawdown since its inception was -4.09%, roughly equal to the maximum CFIT drawdown of -4.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBS and CFIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MBS	CFIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.09%	-4.23%	+0.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.20%	-4.23%	+2.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.46%	-0.33%	-1.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.02%	-1.20%	+0.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.70%	1.12%	-0.42%

Volatility

MBS vs. CFIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) is 0.90%, while Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) has a volatility of 1.69%. This indicates that MBS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CFIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MBS	CFIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.90%	1.69%	-0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.00%	4.34%	-2.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.93%	5.50%	-2.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.99%	5.46%	-1.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.99%	5.46%	-1.47%

MBS vs. CFIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBS has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than CFIT's 0.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

MBS vs. CFIT - Dividend Comparison

MBS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.61%, more than CFIT's 4.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	4.08%	3.14%	0.00%
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF	5.61%	5.28%	4.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MBS and CFIT in my portfolio?

MBS and CFIT have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MBS or CFIT?

CFIT has higher volatility (1.69%) compared to MBS (0.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MBS dropped -4.09% vs CFIT's -4.23%.

Which ETF is better, MBS or CFIT?

On 1-year performance, CFIT leads with 12.64% vs 6.88% for MBS. On fees, MBS is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, MBS has been the lower-risk option at 0.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MBS or CFIT?

Over the 1-year period, CFIT has performed better with a 12.64% return vs 6.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MBS or CFIT?

MBS is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for CFIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MBS or CFIT?

MBS has the higher dividend yield at 5.61%, compared with 4.08% for CFIT.

What is the main difference between MBS and CFIT?

They also come from different issuers: Angel Oak and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MBS and 0.71% for CFIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MBS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.31), 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.