MUSQ vs. CAOS
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 -0.43%/yr vs 3.48%/yr for CAOS. Their -0.01 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. MUSQ charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.
Performance
MUSQ vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUSQ achieves a -12.75% return, which is significantly lower than CAOS's 0.76% return.
MUSQ
- 1D
- -4.84%
- 1M
- -4.32%
- 6M
- -11.21%
- YTD
- -12.75%
- 1Y
- -8.84%
- 3Y*
- -0.43%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 0.00%
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%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $6.81M | $5.39M | $5.09M | |
| $161.63K | $82.87K | $43.23K |
MUSQ vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MUSQ MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF | -12.75% | 19.60% | -4.94% | 0.81% |
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF | 0.76% | 2.55% | 5.33% | 2.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUSQ and CAOS is -0.20, 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. | -0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -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.
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
MUSQ vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank
MUSQ
CAOS
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 1.24 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.46 | 2.47 | -2.93 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.94 | 5.45 | -6.39 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUSQ | CAOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.60% | -1.13% | -17.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.07% | -0.92% | -6.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.39% | 0.34% | +11.05% |
Volatility
MUSQ vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison
MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ) has a higher volatility of 6.64% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUSQ | CAOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.64% | 0.51% | +6.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.14% | 1.07% | +14.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.14% | 1.57% | +16.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.08% | 4.18% | +13.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.08% | 4.18% | +13.90% |
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 0.72%, 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 | 0.72% | 0.63% | 1.08% | 0.74% |
Frequently Asked Questions
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.
MUSQ has higher volatility (6.64%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUSQ dropped -23.11% vs CAOS's -3.89%.
On 3-year performance, CAOS leads with 3.48% vs -0.43% for MUSQ. 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, CAOS has performed better with a 3.48% return vs -0.43%. 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 0.76% for MUSQ.
MUSQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.72%, compared with 0.00% for 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.
CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs -0.59), 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.
Find the right allocation for MUSQ 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