ONOF vs. CEFZ
ONOF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF) and CEFZ (RiverNorth Active Income ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. ONOF is passively managed, while CEFZ is actively managed. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ONOF charges 0.39%/yr vs 3.36%/yr for CEFZ.
Performance
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ONOF achieves a 7.32% return, which is significantly higher than CEFZ's 5.16% return.
ONOF
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 5.26%
- YTD
- 7.32%
- 6M
- 7.29%
- 1Y
- 23.60%
- 3Y*
- 13.72%
- 5Y*
- 9.34%
- 10Y*
- —
CEFZ
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 5.16%
- 6M
- 5.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ONOF Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF | 7.32% | 8.32% |
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 5.16% | 7.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between ONOF and CEFZ is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2025 | 0.68 |
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
ONOF vs. CEFZ — Risk / Return Rank
ONOF
CEFZ
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF (ONOF) and RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ). 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.
| ONOF | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.45 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.88 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ONOF | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.11 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.74 | 1.56 | -0.82 |
Drawdowns
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ONOF drawdown since its inception was -26.21%, which is greater than CEFZ's maximum drawdown of -6.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ONOF and CEFZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ONOF | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.21% | -6.66% | -19.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.86% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.21% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.68% | -0.73% | +0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.15% | -1.20% | -4.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.99% | — | — |
Volatility
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ONOF | CEFZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.03% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.95% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.25% | 10.39% | +0.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.30% | 10.39% | +3.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.33% | 10.39% | +3.94% |
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ONOF has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFZ's 3.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
ONOF vs. CEFZ - Dividend Comparison
ONOF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.29%, less than CEFZ's 8.27% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 8.27% | 4.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ONOF Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF | 1.29% | 1.38% | 0.93% | 1.37% | 1.92% | 0.69% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ONOF and CEFZ have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ONOF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ONOF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 3.36% for CEFZ.
CEFZ has the higher dividend yield at 8.27%, compared with 1.29% for ONOF.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and RiverNorth. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ONOF and 3.36% for CEFZ.
Find the right allocation for ONOF and CEFZ
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