PPI vs. ELM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PPI (Astoria Real Assets ETF) and ELM (Elm Market Navigator ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PPI is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by AXS, while ELM is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by Elm. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PPI returned 35.02% vs 17.21% for ELM. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PPI charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.24%/yr for ELM.

Performance

PPI vs. ELM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Astoria Real Assets ETF (PPI) and Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PPI achieves a 15.09% return, which is significantly higher than ELM's 6.28% return.

PPI

• 1D: -1.62%
• 1M: -1.89%
• YTD: 15.09%
• 6M: 13.39%
• 1Y: 35.02%
• 3Y*: 21.33%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ELM

• 1D: -1.43%
• 1M: -0.17%
• YTD: 6.28%
• 6M: 6.39%
• 1Y: 17.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PPI vs. ELM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PPI Astoria Real Assets ETF	15.09%	22.83%
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF	6.28%	11.88%

Correlation

The correlation between PPI and ELM is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2025	0.70

The correlation between PPI and ELM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PPI vs. ELM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PPI

PPI Risk / Return Rank: 73
PPI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
PPI Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
PPI Omega Ratio Rank: 68
PPI Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
PPI Martin Ratio Rank: 75

ELM

ELM Risk / Return Rank: 56
ELM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
ELM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ELM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
ELM Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
ELM Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

PPI vs. ELM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Astoria Real Assets ETF (PPI) and Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM). 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.

	PPI	ELM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.17	1.77	+0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.84	2.47	+0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.33	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.41	2.30	+2.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.26	9.37	+3.89

PPI vs. ELM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PPI Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is comparable to the ELM Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PPI and ELM, 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

PPI vs. ELM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PPI drawdown since its inception was -24.54%, which is greater than ELM's maximum drawdown of -9.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PPI and ELM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PPI	ELM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.54%	-9.02%	-15.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.98%	-7.52%	-0.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.70%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.45%	-1.76%	-2.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.47%	-1.32%	-5.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.65%	1.84%	+0.81%

Volatility

PPI vs. ELM - Volatility Comparison

Astoria Real Assets ETF (PPI) has a higher volatility of 5.01% compared to Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) at 3.63%. This indicates that PPI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ELM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PPI	ELM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.01%	3.63%	+1.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.01%	8.11%	+4.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.25%	9.79%	+6.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.04%	10.46%	+8.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.04%	10.46%	+8.58%

PPI vs. ELM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PPI has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than ELM's 0.24% expense ratio.

Dividends

PPI vs. ELM - Dividend Comparison

PPI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, less than ELM's 2.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF	2.55%	2.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PPI Astoria Real Assets ETF	1.02%	1.06%	0.60%	2.87%	2.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PPI and ELM in my portfolio?

PPI and ELM have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PPI or ELM?

PPI has higher volatility (5.01%) compared to ELM (3.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PPI dropped -24.54% vs ELM's -9.02%.

Which ETF is better, PPI or ELM?

On 1-year performance, PPI leads with 35.02% vs 17.21% for ELM. On fees, ELM is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, ELM has been the lower-risk option at 3.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PPI or ELM?

Over the 1-year period, PPI has performed better with a 35.02% return vs 17.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PPI or ELM?

ELM is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for PPI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PPI or ELM?

ELM has the higher dividend yield at 2.55%, compared with 1.02% for PPI.

What is the main difference between PPI and ELM?

PPI is categorized as Global Allocation, while ELM is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: AXS and Elm. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for PPI and 0.24% for ELM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PPI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 1.77), 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.