MSTQ vs. RMIF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) and RMIF (LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MSTQ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors, while RMIF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MSTQ returned 17.63%/yr vs 4.44%/yr for RMIF. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MSTQ charges 1.59%/yr vs 1.38%/yr for RMIF.

Performance

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) and LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSTQ achieves a 7.56% return, which is significantly higher than RMIF's -0.91% return.

MSTQ

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: -3.77%
• 6M: 7.22%
• YTD: 7.56%
• 1Y: 16.79%
• 3Y*: 17.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.52%

RMIF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.38%
• 6M: -0.95%
• YTD: -0.91%
• 1Y: 1.78%
• 3Y*: 4.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.61%

*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)
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	$208.12K	$115.43K	$85.76K
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	$1.26M	$978.63K	$401.32K

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	7.56%	20.57%	19.58%	13.33%
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	-0.91%	4.36%	7.00%	4.09%

Correlation

The correlation between MSTQ and RMIF is 0.58, 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.	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023	0.53

The correlation between MSTQ and RMIF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MSTQ vs. RMIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 33
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 31
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 33

RMIF

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) and LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF). 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.

	MSTQ	RMIF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.82	0.63	+0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.22	0.91	+0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.12	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.17	0.70	+0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.18	1.69	+1.49

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSTQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.82, which is higher than the RMIF Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSTQ and RMIF, 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

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSTQ drawdown since its inception was -31.05%, which is greater than RMIF's maximum drawdown of -3.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSTQ and RMIF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSTQ	RMIF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.05%	-3.01%	-28.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.39%	-2.37%	-10.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.22%	-3.01%	-12.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.57%	-1.36%	-7.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.48%	-0.42%	-8.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.56%	0.97%	+3.59%

Volatility

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Volatility Comparison

LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a higher volatility of 7.23% compared to LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) at 0.40%. This indicates that MSTQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RMIF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSTQ	RMIF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	0.40%	+6.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.26%	1.99%	+12.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.60%	2.63%	+14.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.21%	2.56%	+16.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.21%	2.56%	+16.65%

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSTQ has a 1.59% expense ratio, which is higher than RMIF's 1.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSTQ vs. RMIF - Dividend Comparison

MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.98%, while RMIF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	12.98%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	4.82%	5.70%	6.61%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSTQ and RMIF in my portfolio?

MSTQ and RMIF have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSTQ or RMIF?

MSTQ has higher volatility (7.23%) compared to RMIF (0.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSTQ dropped -31.05% vs RMIF's -3.01%.

Which ETF is better, MSTQ or RMIF?

On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 17.63% vs 4.44% for RMIF. On fees, RMIF is cheaper at 1.38% per year. On volatility, RMIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSTQ or RMIF?

Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 17.63% return vs 4.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSTQ or RMIF?

RMIF is cheaper with a 1.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MSTQ or RMIF?

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 12.98%, compared with 4.82% for RMIF.

What is the main difference between MSTQ and RMIF?

MSTQ is categorized as Options Trading, while RMIF is Multisector Bonds. Their fees differ too: 1.59% for MSTQ and 1.38% for RMIF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.82 vs 0.63), 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.