MUSQ vs. CAOS

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

MUSQ (MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MUSQ is a Communications Equities fund tracking the MUSQ Global Music Industry Index, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. MUSQ is passively managed, while CAOS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MUSQ returned 1.53%/yr vs 3.68%/yr for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. MUSQ charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MUSQ achieves a -8.68% return, which is significantly lower than CAOS's 0.70% return.

MUSQ

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 1.09%
• 6M: -8.38%
• YTD: -8.68%
• 1Y: -8.72%
• 3Y*: 1.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.04%
• 6M: 0.23%
• YTD: 0.70%
• 1Y: 1.81%
• 3Y*: 3.68%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MUSQ MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF	-8.68%	19.60%	-4.94%	0.81%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.70%	2.55%	5.33%	2.74%

Correlation

The correlation between MUSQ and CAOS is -0.20, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.20
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2023	-0.01

The correlation between MUSQ and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MUSQ vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MUSQ

MUSQ Risk / Return Rank: 5
MUSQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
MUSQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
MUSQ Omega Ratio Rank: 5
MUSQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
MUSQ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 46
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ) 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.

	MUSQ	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.52	1.15	-1.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.64	1.83	-2.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.23	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.40	2.37	-2.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.85	5.39	-6.24

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MUSQ Sharpe Ratio is -0.52, which is lower than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MUSQ 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.

Drawdowns

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUSQ drawdown since its inception was -23.11%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUSQ and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MUSQ	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.11%	-3.89%	-19.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.11%	-0.76%	-22.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.11%	-3.60%	-19.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.81%	-1.19%	-13.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.90%	-0.92%	-5.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.77%	0.33%	+10.44%

Volatility

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ) has a higher volatility of 5.65% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.49%. This indicates that MUSQ'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.

Volatility by Period

	MUSQ	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	0.49%	+5.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.23%	1.12%	+13.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.44%	1.56%	+15.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.92%	4.21%	+13.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.92%	4.21%	+13.71%

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUSQ has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

MUSQ vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

MUSQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MUSQ MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF	0.69%	0.63%	1.08%	0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MUSQ and CAOS in my portfolio?

MUSQ and CAOS have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MUSQ or CAOS?

MUSQ has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to CAOS (0.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUSQ dropped -23.11% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, MUSQ or CAOS?

On 3-year performance, CAOS leads with 3.68% vs 1.53% for MUSQ. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MUSQ or CAOS?

Over the 3-year period, CAOS has performed better with a 3.68% return vs 1.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MUSQ or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for MUSQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MUSQ or CAOS?

MUSQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.69%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between MUSQ and CAOS?

MUSQ is categorized as Communications Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for MUSQ and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.15 vs -0.52), 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.