RHRX vs. ALLW
RHRX (RH Tactical Rotation ETF) and ALLW (SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RHRX returned 42.26% vs 24.48% for ALLW. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RHRX charges 1.36%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for ALLW.
Performance
RHRX vs. ALLW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RHRX achieves a 21.71% return, which is significantly higher than ALLW's 10.04% return.
RHRX
- 1D
- 1.22%
- 1M
- 6.21%
- YTD
- 21.71%
- 6M
- 22.05%
- 1Y
- 42.26%
- 3Y*
- 23.01%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ALLW
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 1.24%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 6M
- 9.83%
- 1Y
- 24.48%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RHRX vs. ALLW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 21.71% | 21.50% |
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 10.04% | 15.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between RHRX and ALLW is 0.56, 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 | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2025 | 0.54 |
The correlation between RHRX and ALLW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
RHRX vs. ALLW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RHRX
ALLW
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
Healthcare
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Real Estate
Technology
RHRX
ALLW
Industrials
RHRX
ALLW
Basic Materials
RHRX
ALLW
Consumer Cyclical
RHRX
ALLW
Communication Services
RHRX
ALLW
Financial Services
RHRX
ALLW
Healthcare
RHRX
ALLW
Utilities
RHRX
ALLW
Consumer Defensive
RHRX
ALLW
Energy
RHRX
ALLW
Real Estate
RHRX
ALLW
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
RHRX vs. ALLW — Risk / Return Rank
RHRX
ALLW
RHRX vs. ALLW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) and SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). 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.
| RHRX | ALLW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.22 | 2.34 | +0.88 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.33 | 3.15 | +1.18 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | 1.43 | +0.13 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.28 | 3.47 | +2.81 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.67 | 14.77 | +9.90 |
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
| RHRX | ALLW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.22 | 2.34 | +0.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 1.68 | -1.15 |
Drawdowns
RHRX vs. ALLW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RHRX drawdown since its inception was -25.33%, which is greater than ALLW's maximum drawdown of -8.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RHRX and ALLW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RHRX | ALLW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.33% | -8.78% | -16.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.83% | -7.23% | +0.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.03% | +0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.96% | -1.20% | -7.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.74% | 1.70% | +0.04% |
Volatility
RHRX vs. ALLW - Volatility Comparison
RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) has a higher volatility of 4.51% compared to SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) at 3.36%. This indicates that RHRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ALLW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RHRX | ALLW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.51% | 3.36% | +1.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.72% | 8.69% | +1.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.18% | 10.50% | +2.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.04% | 12.54% | +6.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.04% | 12.54% | +6.50% |
RHRX vs. ALLW - Expense Ratio Comparison
RHRX has a 1.36% expense ratio, which is higher than ALLW's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
RHRX vs. ALLW - Dividend Comparison
RHRX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.25%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 4.25% | 4.67% |
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RHRX and ALLW have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RHRX has higher volatility (4.51%) compared to ALLW (3.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RHRX dropped -25.33% vs ALLW's -8.78%.
On 1-year performance, RHRX leads with 42.26% vs 24.48% for ALLW. On fees, ALLW is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, ALLW has been the lower-risk option at 3.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RHRX has performed better with a 42.26% return vs 24.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ALLW is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.36% for RHRX.
ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.25%, compared with 0.00% for RHRX.
They also come from different issuers: Adaptive and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.36% for RHRX and 0.85% for ALLW.
RHRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.22 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.
Find the right allocation for RHRX and ALLW
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