PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MTUL vs. CAOS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MTUL vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MTUL achieves a 38.03% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.76% return.


MTUL

1D
1.89%
1M
-13.31%
6M
35.38%
YTD
38.03%
1Y
49.92%
3Y*
45.94%
5Y*
15.55%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
14.25%

CAOS

1D
-0.06%
1M
-0.01%
6M
0.16%
YTD
0.76%
1Y
1.73%
3Y*
3.48%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
4.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$6.81M$5.39M$5.09M
$228.72K$153.30K$113.30K

MTUL vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
MTUL
ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN
38.03%27.42%58.70%17.42%
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.76%2.55%5.33%7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between MTUL and CAOS is -0.24, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.24

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023

0.05

The correlation between MTUL and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (1 year) to 0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

MTUL vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MTUL
MTUL Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
MTUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUL Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUL Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

CAOS
CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MTUL vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.


MTULCAOSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.24

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.49

2.47

-0.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.15

5.45

+0.70

MTUL vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MTUL Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is comparable to the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MTUL and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MTUL vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MTUL drawdown since its inception was -56.83%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MTUL and CAOS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MTULCAOSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.83%

-3.89%

-52.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.27%

-0.76%

-31.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-39.15%

-3.60%

-35.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.74%

-1.13%

-21.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.29%

-0.92%

-21.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.79%

0.34%

+7.45%

Volatility

MTUL vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a higher volatility of 26.81% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. This indicates that MTUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MTULCAOSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

26.81%

0.51%

+26.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

50.13%

1.07%

+49.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

56.27%

1.57%

+54.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.40%

4.18%

+41.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

45.65%

4.18%

+41.47%

MTUL vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MTUL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.


Dividends

MTUL vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

Neither MTUL nor CAOS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MTUL and CAOS have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MTUL has higher volatility (26.81%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MTUL dropped -56.83% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

On 3-year performance, MTUL leads with 45.94% vs 3.48% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 45.94% return vs 3.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MTUL.

MTUL and CAOS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

MTUL is categorized as Momentum, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MTUL and 0.63% for CAOS.

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 0.85), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MTUL and CAOS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer