PRAE vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PRAE (PlanRock Alternative Growth ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PRAE is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by PlanRock, while CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed. PRAE is actively managed, while CLSM is passively managed. Over the past year, PRAE returned 34.75% vs 34.21% for CLSM. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PRAE charges 1.43%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

PRAE vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PlanRock Alternative Growth ETF (PRAE) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRAE achieves a 12.14% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 20.45% return.

PRAE

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 4.32%
• YTD: 12.14%
• 6M: 12.91%
• 1Y: 34.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSM

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 9.23%
• YTD: 20.45%
• 6M: 20.19%
• 1Y: 34.21%
• 3Y*: 13.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PRAE vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PRAE PlanRock Alternative Growth ETF	12.14%	13.70%	8.54%	0.57%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	20.45%	15.32%	1.87%	0.27%

Correlation

The correlation between PRAE and CLSM is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2023	0.75

The correlation between PRAE and CLSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

PRAE vs. CLSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PRAE	CLSM
Industrials	18.9%	1.0%
Financial Services	18.4%	0.1%
Technology	15.2%	51.8%
Energy	10.3%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	4.4%
Healthcare	7.0%	1.4%
Basic Materials	6.5%	0.4%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	34.8%
Communication Services	4.4%	5.5%
Real Estate	2.8%	0.0%
Utilities	2.4%	0.5%

Return for Risk

PRAE vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PRAE

PRAE Risk / Return Rank: 70
PRAE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
PRAE Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
PRAE Omega Ratio Rank: 72
PRAE Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PRAE Martin Ratio Rank: 69

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 82
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CLSM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

PRAE vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PlanRock Alternative Growth ETF (PRAE) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). 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.

	PRAE	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	2.71	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.97	3.58	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.50	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.57	4.04	-0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.50	16.72	-4.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PRAE vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRAE Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRAE and CLSM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PRAE	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	2.71	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	0.35	+0.63

Drawdowns

PRAE vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRAE drawdown since its inception was -17.67%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRAE and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PRAE	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.67%	-27.77%	+10.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.77%	-8.50%	-1.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-0.38%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.13%	-16.49%	+12.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.79%	2.05%	+0.74%

Volatility

PRAE vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

PlanRock Alternative Growth ETF (PRAE) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) have volatilities of 3.66% and 3.58%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PRAE	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.66%	3.58%	+0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.98%	10.54%	+1.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.90%	12.70%	+2.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.82%	12.47%	+2.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.82%	12.47%	+2.35%

PRAE vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PRAE has a 1.43% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

PRAE vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

PRAE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.47%, less than CLSM's 0.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.75%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%
PRAE PlanRock Alternative Growth ETF	0.47%	0.18%	0.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PRAE and CLSM in my portfolio?

PRAE and CLSM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PRAE or CLSM?

PRAE has higher volatility (3.66%) compared to CLSM (3.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PRAE dropped -17.67% vs CLSM's -27.77%.

Which ETF is better, PRAE or CLSM?

On 1-year performance, PRAE leads with 34.75% vs 34.21% for CLSM. On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PRAE or CLSM?

Over the 1-year period, PRAE has performed better with a 34.75% return vs 34.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PRAE or CLSM?

CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 1.43% for PRAE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PRAE or CLSM?

CLSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.75%, compared with 0.47% for PRAE.

What is the main difference between PRAE and CLSM?

PRAE is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CLSM is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: PlanRock and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 1.43% for PRAE and 0.82% for CLSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.34), 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.