ONLN vs. RTH

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ONLN (ProShares Online Retail ETF) and RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) are both Consumer Discretionary Equities funds - ONLN tracks the ProShares Online Retail Index while RTH tracks the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ONLN returned -7.66%/yr vs 9.06%/yr for RTH. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ONLN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RTH.

Performance

ONLN vs. RTH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Online Retail ETF (ONLN) and VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ONLN achieves a -8.58% return, which is significantly lower than RTH's 2.29% return.

ONLN

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: -5.60%
• YTD: -8.58%
• 6M: -9.03%
• 1Y: 10.27%
• 3Y*: 19.82%
• 5Y*: -7.66%
• 10Y*: —

RTH

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -3.21%
• YTD: 2.29%
• 6M: 1.90%
• 1Y: 9.66%
• 3Y*: 15.15%
• 5Y*: 9.06%
• 10Y*: 14.17%

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

ONLN vs. RTH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ONLN ProShares Online Retail ETF	-8.58%	33.03%	24.85%	27.37%	-50.07%	-25.22%	111.82%	19.93%	-24.66%
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	2.29%	12.36%	20.02%	20.07%	-17.67%	24.94%	31.62%	29.06%	-8.08%

Correlation

The correlation between ONLN and RTH is 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2018	0.71

The correlation between ONLN and RTH shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.72 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ONLN vs. RTH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ONLN	RTH
Consumer Cyclical	95.1%	57.2%
Technology	3.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	26.8%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	13.4%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ONLN vs. RTH — Risk / Return Rank

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

ONLN

ONLN Risk / Return Rank: 15
ONLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
ONLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
ONLN Omega Ratio Rank: 14
ONLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
ONLN Martin Ratio Rank: 15

RTH

RTH Risk / Return Rank: 25
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 22
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

ONLN vs. RTH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Online Retail ETF (ONLN) and VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH). 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.

	ONLN	RTH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.42	0.78	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.74	1.22	-0.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.14	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.52	1.24	-0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.23	3.93	-2.70

ONLN vs. RTH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ONLN Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is lower than the RTH Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ONLN and RTH, 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

ONLN vs. RTH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ONLN drawdown since its inception was -71.77%, which is greater than RTH's maximum drawdown of -42.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ONLN and RTH.

Drawdown Indicators

	ONLN	RTH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.77%	-42.32%	-29.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.75%	-7.83%	-11.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.97%	-13.80%	-14.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.19%	-25.00%	-44.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-25.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.80%	-5.46%	-35.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.45%	-7.33%	-28.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.35%	2.46%	+5.89%

Volatility

ONLN vs. RTH - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Online Retail ETF (ONLN) has a higher volatility of 7.48% compared to VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) at 4.59%. This indicates that ONLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ONLN	RTH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.48%	4.59%	+2.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.30%	9.71%	+8.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.36%	12.40%	+11.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.15%	16.85%	+16.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.08%	17.57%	+14.51%

ONLN vs. RTH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ONLN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than RTH's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

ONLN vs. RTH - Dividend Comparison

ONLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than RTH's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ONLN ProShares Online Retail ETF	0.36%	0.30%	0.75%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	0.95%	0.97%	0.77%	1.07%	1.16%	0.78%	0.64%	0.91%	1.05%	1.56%	1.84%	2.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ONLN and RTH in my portfolio?

ONLN and RTH have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ONLN or RTH?

ONLN has higher volatility (7.48%) compared to RTH (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ONLN dropped -71.77% vs RTH's -42.32%.

Which ETF is better, ONLN or RTH?

On 5-year performance, RTH leads with 9.06% vs -7.66% for ONLN. On fees, RTH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RTH has been the lower-risk option at 4.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ONLN or RTH?

Over the 5-year period, RTH has performed better with a 9.06% return vs -7.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ONLN or RTH?

RTH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for ONLN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ONLN or RTH?

RTH has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.36% for ONLN.

What is the main difference between ONLN and RTH?

ONLN tracks ProShares Online Retail Index, while RTH tracks MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for ONLN and 0.35% for RTH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.78 vs 0.42), 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.