MGMT vs. RUNN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MGMT (Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF) and RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MGMT returned 28.05% vs -0.93% for RUNN. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MGMT charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RUNN.

Performance

MGMT vs. RUNN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGMT achieves a 11.12% return, which is significantly higher than RUNN's -2.05% return.

MGMT

• 1D: 1.21%
• 1M: 1.18%
• YTD: 11.12%
• 6M: 10.84%
• 1Y: 28.05%
• 3Y*: 14.69%
• 5Y*: 7.20%
• 10Y*: —

RUNN

• 1D: 0.98%
• 1M: -0.71%
• YTD: -2.05%
• 6M: -2.63%
• 1Y: -0.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MGMT vs. RUNN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	11.12%	6.96%	12.95%	9.10%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	-2.05%	2.30%	17.16%	12.05%

Correlation

The correlation between MGMT and RUNN is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023	0.74

The correlation between MGMT and RUNN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

MGMT vs. RUNN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MGMT	RUNN
Industrials	23.1%	39.4%
Energy	15.7%	-
Technology	13.6%	17.8%
Basic Materials	13.4%	2.0%
Financial Services	11.1%	12.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	8.3%
Healthcare	6.2%	13.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	-
Communication Services	3.5%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.8%	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MGMT vs. RUNN — Risk / Return Rank

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

MGMT

MGMT Risk / Return Rank: 46
MGMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
MGMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
MGMT Omega Ratio Rank: 43
MGMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
MGMT Martin Ratio Rank: 43

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 8
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

MGMT vs. RUNN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) 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.

	MGMT	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	-0.07	+1.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	-0.01	+2.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.00	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.29	-0.09	+2.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.94	-0.21	+7.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MGMT vs. RUNN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is higher than the RUNN Sharpe Ratio of -0.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGMT and RUNN, 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

	MGMT	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.61	-0.07	+1.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	0.70	-0.01

Drawdowns

MGMT vs. RUNN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGMT drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, which is greater than RUNN's maximum drawdown of -16.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGMT and RUNN.

Drawdown Indicators

	MGMT	RUNN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.95%	-16.83%	-8.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.32%	-10.34%	-1.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.54%	-6.99%	+5.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.74%	-3.54%	-3.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.05%	4.36%	-0.31%

Volatility

MGMT vs. RUNN - Volatility Comparison

Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) has a higher volatility of 4.17% compared to Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) at 3.69%. This indicates that MGMT'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.

Volatility by Period

	MGMT	RUNN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.17%	3.69%	+0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.96%	9.75%	+2.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.50%	12.87%	+4.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.54%	13.81%	+5.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.57%	13.81%	+5.76%

MGMT vs. RUNN - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGMT has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than RUNN's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

MGMT vs. RUNN - Dividend Comparison

MGMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%, less than RUNN's 0.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	0.31%	0.34%	0.51%	1.16%	0.90%	0.26%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.57%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MGMT and RUNN in my portfolio?

MGMT and RUNN have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MGMT or RUNN?

MGMT has higher volatility (4.17%) compared to RUNN (3.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGMT dropped -24.95% vs RUNN's -16.83%.

Which ETF is better, MGMT or RUNN?

On 1-year performance, MGMT leads with 28.05% vs -0.93% for RUNN. On fees, RUNN is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MGMT or RUNN?

Over the 1-year period, MGMT has performed better with a 28.05% return vs -0.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MGMT or RUNN?

RUNN is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for MGMT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MGMT or RUNN?

RUNN has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.31% for MGMT.

What is the main difference between MGMT and RUNN?

They also come from different issuers: Inverdale Capital Management LLC and Running Oak Capital. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for MGMT and 0.58% for RUNN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MGMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.61 vs -0.07), 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.