RHRX vs. TBFG
RHRX (RH Tactical Rotation ETF) and TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RHRX returned 40.94% vs 24.53% for TBFG. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RHRX charges 1.36%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for TBFG.
Performance
RHRX vs. TBFG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RHRX achieves a 21.30% return, which is significantly higher than TBFG's 10.35% return.
RHRX
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 6.95%
- YTD
- 21.30%
- 6M
- 21.26%
- 1Y
- 40.94%
- 3Y*
- 22.87%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TBFG
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 4.39%
- YTD
- 10.35%
- 6M
- 11.14%
- 1Y
- 24.53%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RHRX vs. TBFG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 21.30% | 16.70% | 22.00% |
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 10.35% | 14.56% | 10.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between RHRX and TBFG 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 Jan 17, 2024 | 0.84 |
The correlation between RHRX and TBFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
RHRX vs. TBFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RHRX
TBFG
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
Healthcare
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Real Estate
Technology
RHRX
TBFG
Industrials
RHRX
TBFG
Basic Materials
RHRX
TBFG
Consumer Cyclical
RHRX
TBFG
Communication Services
RHRX
TBFG
Financial Services
RHRX
TBFG
Healthcare
RHRX
TBFG
Utilities
RHRX
TBFG
Consumer Defensive
RHRX
TBFG
Energy
RHRX
TBFG
Real Estate
RHRX
TBFG
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. TBFG — Risk / Return Rank
RHRX
TBFG
RHRX vs. TBFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) and The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG). 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 | TBFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.12 | 2.53 | +0.59 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.21 | 3.54 | +0.67 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.47 | +0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.02 | 3.23 | +2.80 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.61 | 13.95 | +9.66 |
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 | TBFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.12 | 2.53 | +0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 1.38 | -0.86 |
Drawdowns
RHRX vs. TBFG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RHRX drawdown since its inception was -25.33%, which is greater than TBFG's maximum drawdown of -13.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RHRX and TBFG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RHRX | TBFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.33% | -13.43% | -11.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.83% | -7.63% | +0.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.34% | -0.36% | +0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.95% | -1.63% | -7.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.74% | 1.76% | -0.02% |
Volatility
RHRX vs. TBFG - Volatility Comparison
RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) has a higher volatility of 4.35% compared to The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) at 3.00%. This indicates that RHRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TBFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RHRX | TBFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.35% | 3.00% | +1.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.73% | 8.00% | +1.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.19% | 9.73% | +3.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.03% | 10.95% | +8.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.03% | 10.95% | +8.08% |
RHRX vs. TBFG - Expense Ratio Comparison
RHRX has a 1.36% expense ratio, which is higher than TBFG's 0.42% expense ratio.
Dividends
RHRX vs. TBFG - Dividend Comparison
RHRX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 2.35% | 2.65% | 2.43% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RHRX and TBFG 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.
RHRX has higher volatility (4.35%) compared to TBFG (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RHRX dropped -25.33% vs TBFG's -13.43%.
On 1-year performance, RHRX leads with 40.94% vs 24.53% for TBFG. On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, TBFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.00%. 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 40.94% return vs 24.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 1.36% for RHRX.
TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 0.00% for RHRX.
They also come from different issuers: Adaptive and The Brinsmere Funds. Their fees differ too: 1.36% for RHRX and 0.42% for TBFG.
RHRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 2.53), 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 TBFG
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