NDAA vs. RULE

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

NDAA (Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF) and RULE (Adaptive Core ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NDAA returned 21.73% vs 46.18% for RULE. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NDAA charges 0.65%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for RULE.

Performance

NDAA vs. RULE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF (NDAA) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NDAA achieves a 8.02% return, which is significantly lower than RULE's 42.32% return.

NDAA

• 1D: -1.66%
• 1M: -1.70%
• YTD: 8.02%
• 6M: 7.54%
• 1Y: 21.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RULE

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: 7.59%
• YTD: 42.32%
• 6M: 39.96%
• 1Y: 46.18%
• 3Y*: 19.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NDAA vs. RULE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NDAA Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF	8.02%	14.00%	-1.48%
RULE Adaptive Core ETF	42.32%	4.60%	-1.66%

Correlation

The correlation between NDAA and RULE is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2024	0.83

The correlation between NDAA and RULE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NDAA vs. RULE — Risk / Return Rank

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

NDAA

NDAA Risk / Return Rank: 65
NDAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
NDAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
NDAA Omega Ratio Rank: 64
NDAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
NDAA Martin Ratio Rank: 70

RULE

RULE Risk / Return Rank: 73
RULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
RULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
RULE Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
RULE Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

NDAA vs. RULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF (NDAA) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). 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.

	NDAA	RULE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	1.99	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	2.63	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.36	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.86	3.67	-0.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.75	14.09	-2.34

NDAA vs. RULE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NDAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the RULE Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NDAA and RULE, 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

NDAA vs. RULE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NDAA drawdown since its inception was -13.50%, smaller than the maximum RULE drawdown of -30.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NDAA and RULE.

Drawdown Indicators

	NDAA	RULE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.50%	-30.48%	+16.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.62%	-12.65%	+5.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.21%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.23%	-5.01%	+1.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.96%	-14.83%	+12.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.85%	3.29%	-1.44%

Volatility

NDAA vs. RULE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF (NDAA) is 4.54%, while Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a volatility of 13.02%. This indicates that NDAA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RULE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NDAA	RULE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.54%	13.02%	-8.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.22%	20.70%	-11.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.37%	23.29%	-11.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.21%	15.69%	-3.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.21%	15.69%	-3.48%

NDAA vs. RULE - Expense Ratio Comparison

NDAA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than RULE's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

NDAA vs. RULE - Dividend Comparison

NDAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, while RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
NDAA Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF	2.51%	2.71%	0.83%	0.00%	0.00%
RULE Adaptive Core ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.01%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NDAA and RULE in my portfolio?

NDAA and RULE have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NDAA or RULE?

RULE has higher volatility (13.02%) compared to NDAA (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NDAA dropped -13.50% vs RULE's -30.48%.

Which ETF is better, NDAA or RULE?

On 1-year performance, RULE leads with 46.18% vs 21.73% for NDAA. On fees, NDAA is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, NDAA has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NDAA or RULE?

Over the 1-year period, RULE has performed better with a 46.18% return vs 21.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NDAA or RULE?

NDAA is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for RULE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NDAA or RULE?

NDAA has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 0.00% for RULE.

What is the main difference between NDAA and RULE?

They also come from different issuers: Ned Davis Research and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for NDAA and 1.10% for RULE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RULE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.92), 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.