RIGS vs. BFOR
RIGS (RiverFront Strategic Income Fund) and BFOR (ALPS Barron's 400 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RIGS is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by SS&C, while BFOR is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Barron's 400 Index. RIGS is actively managed, while BFOR is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RIGS returned 3.15%/yr vs 12.37%/yr for BFOR. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RIGS charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for BFOR.
Performance
RIGS vs. BFOR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RIGS achieves a 0.76% return, which is significantly lower than BFOR's 9.89% return. Over the past 10 years, RIGS has underperformed BFOR with an annualized return of 3.15%, while BFOR has yielded a comparatively higher 12.37% annualized return.
RIGS
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 0.07%
- YTD
- 0.76%
- 6M
- 0.41%
- 1Y
- 3.91%
- 3Y*
- 4.62%
- 5Y*
- 2.13%
- 10Y*
- 3.15%
BFOR
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 2.26%
- YTD
- 9.89%
- 6M
- 10.61%
- 1Y
- 22.04%
- 3Y*
- 19.35%
- 5Y*
- 9.98%
- 10Y*
- 12.37%
RIGS vs. BFOR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RIGS RiverFront Strategic Income Fund | 0.76% | 4.63% | 4.45% | 6.07% | -5.72% | 1.93% | 3.58% | 7.60% | -0.11% | 4.48% |
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF | 9.89% | 13.85% | 17.81% | 18.19% | -15.92% | 30.71% | 17.60% | 21.30% | -13.86% | 19.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between RIGS and BFOR is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2013 | 0.31 |
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
RIGS vs. BFOR — Risk / Return Rank
RIGS
BFOR
RIGS vs. BFOR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS) and ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR). 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.
| RIGS | BFOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.42 | 1.50 | -1.08 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.66 | 2.23 | -1.57 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.26 | -0.17 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.86 | 2.46 | -1.60 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.06 | 9.02 | -6.96 |
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
| RIGS | BFOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 | 1.50 | -1.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 | 0.52 | -0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.41 | 0.61 | -0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 0.59 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
RIGS vs. BFOR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RIGS drawdown since its inception was -15.31%, smaller than the maximum BFOR drawdown of -41.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIGS and BFOR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RIGS | BFOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.31% | -41.27% | +25.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.55% | -8.98% | +4.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.18% | -21.91% | +16.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -9.03% | -25.93% | +16.90% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -15.31% | -41.27% | +25.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.68% | -0.49% | -1.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.60% | -6.43% | +4.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.90% | 2.45% | -0.55% |
Volatility
RIGS vs. BFOR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS) is 1.32%, while ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) has a volatility of 3.52%. This indicates that RIGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BFOR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RIGS | BFOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.32% | 3.52% | -2.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.74% | 10.64% | -5.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.33% | 14.80% | -5.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.50% | 19.41% | -11.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.75% | 20.41% | -12.66% |
RIGS vs. BFOR - Expense Ratio Comparison
RIGS has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than BFOR's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
RIGS vs. BFOR - Dividend Comparison
RIGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.88%, more than BFOR's 0.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF | 0.54% | 0.60% | 0.69% | 1.26% | 1.68% | 0.92% | 0.98% | 0.69% | 0.94% | 0.60% | 0.78% | 0.86% |
RIGS RiverFront Strategic Income Fund | 4.88% | 4.84% | 4.49% | 3.48% | 2.71% | 2.47% | 3.77% | 3.87% | 4.54% | 4.45% | 4.46% | 3.61% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RIGS and BFOR have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BFOR has higher volatility (3.52%) compared to RIGS (1.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIGS dropped -15.31% vs BFOR's -41.27%.
On 10-year performance, BFOR leads with 12.37% vs 3.15% for RIGS. On fees, RIGS is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, RIGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, BFOR has performed better with a 12.37% return vs 3.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RIGS is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BFOR.
RIGS has the higher dividend yield at 4.88%, compared with 0.54% for BFOR.
RIGS is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while BFOR is Mid Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RIGS and 0.65% for BFOR.
BFOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.50 vs 0.42), 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 RIGS and BFOR
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