MIDE vs. FLDZ

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

MIDE (Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF) and FLDZ (RiverNorth Patriot ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. MIDE is passively managed, while FLDZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MIDE returned 14.02%/yr vs 11.40%/yr for FLDZ. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. MIDE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for FLDZ.

Performance

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE) and RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MIDE achieves a 16.15% return, which is significantly higher than FLDZ's 6.89% return.

MIDE

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 0.72%
• 6M: 10.72%
• YTD: 16.15%
• 1Y: 26.71%
• 3Y*: 14.02%
• 5Y*: 8.91%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.21%

FLDZ

• 1D: 3.37%
• 1M: -1.65%
• 6M: 4.99%
• YTD: 6.89%
• 1Y: 9.59%
• 3Y*: 11.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.97%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	$2.99K	$1.93K	$1.75K
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF	$7.19K	$26.37K	$22.11K

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF	16.15%	9.81%	11.21%	15.20%	-11.63%
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	6.89%	6.66%	15.99%	12.15%	-12.07%

Correlation

The correlation between MIDE and FLDZ is 0.77, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2022	0.92

The correlation between MIDE and FLDZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (1 year) to 0.92 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MIDE	FLDZ
Industrials	19.6%	12.3%
Financial Services	16.6%	15.5%
Technology	13.7%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	14.6%
Healthcare	9.7%	13.2%
Real Estate	9.1%	8.7%
Basic Materials	7.2%	1.5%
Energy	6.0%	10.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	4.7%
Utilities	1.7%	11.6%
Communication Services	1.1%	4.2%

Return for Risk

MIDE vs. FLDZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MIDE

MIDE Risk / Return Rank: 73
MIDE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
MIDE Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
MIDE Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MIDE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
MIDE Martin Ratio Rank: 77

FLDZ

FLDZ Risk / Return Rank: 31
FLDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
FLDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
FLDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 28
FLDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
FLDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 36

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE) and RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	MIDE	FLDZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	0.70	+1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	1.06	+1.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.14	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	1.24	+1.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.31	3.92	+6.39

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MIDE Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is higher than the FLDZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MIDE and FLDZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MIDE drawdown since its inception was -24.59%, which is greater than FLDZ's maximum drawdown of -19.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MIDE and FLDZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	MIDE	FLDZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.59%	-19.54%	-5.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.36%	-7.78%	-1.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.59%	-17.43%	-7.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.53%	-1.65%	+1.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.33%	-5.85%	-0.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.60%	2.45%	+0.15%

Volatility

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE) is 3.48%, while RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ) has a volatility of 8.56%. This indicates that MIDE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLDZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MIDE	FLDZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.48%	8.56%	-5.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.54%	11.11%	+0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.78%	13.78%	+2.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.62%	17.11%	+2.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.51%	17.11%	+2.40%

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MIDE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FLDZ's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

MIDE vs. FLDZ - Dividend Comparison

MIDE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, less than FLDZ's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	1.44%	1.54%	1.17%	1.39%	1.52%	0.00%
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF	1.25%	1.52%	1.45%	1.36%	1.33%	0.93%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MIDE and FLDZ in my portfolio?

MIDE and FLDZ have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MIDE or FLDZ?

FLDZ has higher volatility (8.56%) compared to MIDE (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MIDE dropped -24.59% vs FLDZ's -19.54%.

Which ETF is better, MIDE or FLDZ?

On 3-year performance, MIDE leads with 14.02% vs 11.40% for FLDZ. On fees, MIDE is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, MIDE has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MIDE or FLDZ?

Over the 3-year period, MIDE has performed better with a 14.02% return vs 11.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MIDE or FLDZ?

MIDE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for FLDZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MIDE or FLDZ?

FLDZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 1.25% for MIDE.

What is the main difference between MIDE and FLDZ?

They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and RiverNorth. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for MIDE and 0.77% for FLDZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MIDE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 0.70), 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.