PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RAA vs. TUG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RAA vs. TUG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) and STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RAA achieves a 10.92% return, which is significantly lower than TUG's 19.74% return.


RAA

1D
-0.11%
1M
2.74%
YTD
10.92%
6M
10.91%
1Y
24.20%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

TUG

1D
-0.52%
1M
9.11%
YTD
19.74%
6M
18.61%
1Y
39.02%
3Y*
23.39%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RAA vs. TUG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
RAA
SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF
10.92%12.12%
TUG
STF Tactical Growth ETF
19.74%19.78%

Correlation

The correlation between RAA and TUG is 0.87, 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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2025

0.89

The correlation between RAA and TUG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

RAA vs. TUG — Risk / Return Rank

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

RAA
RAA Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
RAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RAA Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
RAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
RAA Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

TUG
TUG Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
TUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
TUG Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
TUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
TUG Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RAA vs. TUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) and STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG). 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.


RAATUGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.41

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.11

3.18

+0.93

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.57

12.13

+4.43

RAA vs. TUG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RAA Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is comparable to the TUG Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RAA and TUG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RAATUGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

2.43

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.48

1.11

+0.37

Drawdowns

RAA vs. TUG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RAA drawdown since its inception was -11.80%, smaller than the maximum TUG drawdown of -22.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RAA and TUG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RAATUGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.80%

-22.27%

+10.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.91%

-12.31%

+6.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.51%

-0.99%

+0.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.41%

-4.31%

+2.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.46%

3.23%

-1.77%

Volatility

RAA vs. TUG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) is 2.85%, while STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) has a volatility of 4.35%. This indicates that RAA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TUG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RAATUGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.85%

4.35%

-1.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.44%

12.22%

-4.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.48%

16.16%

-6.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.69%

18.01%

-5.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.69%

18.01%

-5.32%

RAA vs. TUG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RAA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than TUG's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

RAA vs. TUG - Dividend Comparison

RAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, more than TUG's 1.43% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
RAA
SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF
2.11%2.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TUG
STF Tactical Growth ETF
1.43%1.75%4.97%1.34%1.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


RAA and TUG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TUG has higher volatility (4.35%) compared to RAA (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RAA dropped -11.80% vs TUG's -22.27%.

On 1-year performance, TUG leads with 39.02% vs 24.20% for RAA. On fees, TUG is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, RAA has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TUG has performed better with a 39.02% return vs 24.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TUG is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for RAA.

RAA has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 1.43% for TUG.

They also come from different issuers: SMI Advisory Services and STF. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RAA and 0.65% for TUG.

RAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 2.43), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RAA and TUG

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