RHRX vs. CEFS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RHRX (RH Tactical Rotation ETF) and CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RHRX is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by Adaptive, while CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RHRX returned 21.00%/yr vs 22.09%/yr for CEFS. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RHRX charges 1.36%/yr vs 2.61%/yr for CEFS.

Performance

RHRX vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RHRX achieves a 18.02% return, which is significantly higher than CEFS's 15.16% return.

RHRX

• 1D: -2.79%
• 1M: 0.50%
• YTD: 18.02%
• 6M: 17.04%
• 1Y: 35.22%
• 3Y*: 21.00%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CEFS

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 4.16%
• YTD: 15.16%
• 6M: 16.21%
• 1Y: 26.43%
• 3Y*: 22.09%
• 5Y*: 14.29%
• 10Y*: —

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

RHRX vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF	18.02%	16.70%	22.21%	10.28%	-20.05%	1.33%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	15.16%	16.67%	23.48%	20.99%	-7.08%	-1.07%

Correlation

The correlation between RHRX and CEFS is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2021	0.58

The correlation between RHRX and CEFS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RHRX vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

RHRX

RHRX Risk / Return Rank: 85
RHRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
RHRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
RHRX Omega Ratio Rank: 80
RHRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
RHRX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 86
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

RHRX vs. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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.

	RHRX	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	2.57	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.31	3.70	-0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.49	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.18	4.68	+0.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.38	17.98	+1.40

RHRX vs. CEFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RHRX Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the CEFS Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RHRX and CEFS, 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

RHRX vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RHRX drawdown since its inception was -25.33%, smaller than the maximum CEFS drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RHRX and CEFS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RHRX	CEFS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.33%	-38.99%	+13.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.83%	-5.67%	-1.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.90%	-13.37%	-8.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.34%	-0.23%	-3.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.87%	-3.65%	-5.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.82%	1.47%	+0.35%

Volatility

RHRX vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison

RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) has a higher volatility of 6.49% compared to Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) at 4.04%. This indicates that RHRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RHRX	CEFS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.49%	4.04%	+2.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.22%	9.01%	+2.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.24%	10.34%	+3.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.12%	13.16%	+5.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.12%	15.33%	+3.79%

RHRX vs. CEFS - Expense Ratio Comparison

RHRX has a 1.36% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFS's 2.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

RHRX vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison

RHRX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.01%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	7.01%	7.84%	8.79%	9.20%	11.32%	10.73%	8.61%	8.10%	10.43%	5.02%
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RHRX and CEFS in my portfolio?

RHRX and CEFS have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RHRX or CEFS?

RHRX has higher volatility (6.49%) compared to CEFS (4.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RHRX dropped -25.33% vs CEFS's -38.99%.

Which ETF is better, RHRX or CEFS?

On 3-year performance, CEFS leads with 22.09% vs 21.00% for RHRX. On fees, RHRX is cheaper at 1.36% per year. On volatility, CEFS has been the lower-risk option at 4.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RHRX or CEFS?

Over the 3-year period, CEFS has performed better with a 22.09% return vs 21.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RHRX or CEFS?

RHRX is cheaper with a 1.36% expense ratio, compared with 2.61% for CEFS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RHRX or CEFS?

CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.01%, compared with 0.00% for RHRX.

What is the main difference between RHRX and CEFS?

RHRX is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while CEFS is Event Driven. They also come from different issuers: Adaptive and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 1.36% for RHRX and 2.61% for CEFS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 2.49), 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.