QVOY vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QVOY (Q3 All-Season Active Rotation ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVOY is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Q3, while CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed. QVOY is actively managed, while CLSM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVOY returned 15.66%/yr vs 13.75%/yr for CLSM. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QVOY charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

QVOY vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Q3 All-Season Active Rotation ETF (QVOY) 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, QVOY achieves a 17.87% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 20.45% return.

QVOY

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 7.72%
• YTD: 17.87%
• 6M: 19.53%
• 1Y: 36.83%
• 3Y*: 15.66%
• 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)

QVOY vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QVOY Q3 All-Season Active Rotation ETF	17.87%	16.45%	1.55%	17.19%	-0.53%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	20.45%	15.32%	1.87%	3.78%	-1.94%

Correlation

The correlation between QVOY and CLSM is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2022	0.66

The correlation between QVOY and CLSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

QVOY vs. CLSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QVOY	CLSM
Energy	19.3%	0.2%
Utilities	18.7%	0.5%
Technology	15.3%	51.8%
Financial Services	11.4%	0.1%
Industrials	9.9%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	6.5%	4.4%
Healthcare	5.8%	1.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	34.8%
Real Estate	3.5%	0.0%
Communication Services	3.1%	5.5%
Basic Materials	3.0%	0.4%

Return for Risk

QVOY vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVOY

QVOY Risk / Return Rank: 70
QVOY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
QVOY Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
QVOY Omega Ratio Rank: 71
QVOY Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
QVOY Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

QVOY vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Q3 All-Season Active Rotation ETF (QVOY) 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.

	QVOY	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.33	2.71	-0.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	3.58	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.50	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	4.04	-0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.07	16.72	-4.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QVOY vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVOY Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is comparable to the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVOY 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

	QVOY	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.33	2.71	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.01	0.35	+0.66

Drawdowns

QVOY vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVOY drawdown since its inception was -17.05%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVOY and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QVOY	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.05%	-27.77%	+10.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.39%	-8.50%	-0.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.05%	-14.60%	-2.45%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-0.38%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.74%	-16.49%	+12.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.06%	2.05%	+1.01%

Volatility

QVOY vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

Q3 All-Season Active Rotation ETF (QVOY) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) at 3.58%. This indicates that QVOY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QVOY	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.58%	3.58%	+1.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.58%	10.54%	+2.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.90%	12.70%	+3.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.93%	12.47%	+2.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.93%	12.47%	+2.46%

QVOY vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVOY has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

QVOY vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

QVOY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.89%, more 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%
QVOY Q3 All-Season Active Rotation ETF	7.89%	9.30%	10.88%	6.03%	0.46%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QVOY and CLSM in my portfolio?

QVOY and CLSM have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QVOY or CLSM?

QVOY has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to CLSM (3.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVOY dropped -17.05% vs CLSM's -27.77%.

Which ETF is better, QVOY or CLSM?

On 3-year performance, QVOY leads with 15.66% vs 13.75% for CLSM. On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. On volatility, CLSM has been the lower-risk option at 3.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QVOY or CLSM?

Over the 3-year period, QVOY has performed better with a 15.66% return vs 13.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QVOY or CLSM?

CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for QVOY.

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

QVOY has the higher dividend yield at 7.89%, compared with 0.75% for CLSM.

What is the main difference between QVOY and CLSM?

QVOY is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CLSM is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Q3 and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for QVOY and 0.82% for CLSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.33), 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.