PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RIGS vs. LDRH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RIGS vs. LDRH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS) and iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF (LDRH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RIGS achieves a 0.76% return, which is significantly lower than LDRH's 1.79% 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%

LDRH

1D
-0.20%
1M
0.18%
YTD
1.79%
6M
2.28%
1Y
6.43%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RIGS vs. LDRH - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RIGS and LDRH is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2024

0.27

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. LDRH — Risk / Return Rank

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

RIGS
RIGS Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
RIGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RIGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
RIGS Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
RIGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
RIGS Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

LDRH
LDRH Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
LDRH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDRH Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDRH Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
LDRH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDRH Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

RIGS vs. LDRH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS) and iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF (LDRH). 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.


RIGSLDRHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.49

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.86

5.24

-4.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.06

21.81

-19.75

RIGS vs. LDRH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RIGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is lower than the LDRH Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RIGS and LDRH, 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


RIGSLDRHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.42

2.48

-2.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

1.69

-1.23

Drawdowns

RIGS vs. LDRH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RIGS drawdown since its inception was -15.31%, which is greater than LDRH's maximum drawdown of -3.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIGS and LDRH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RIGSLDRHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.31%

-3.17%

-12.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.55%

-1.23%

-3.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-9.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-15.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.68%

-0.20%

-1.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.60%

-0.24%

-1.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.90%

0.30%

+1.60%

Volatility

RIGS vs. LDRH - Volatility Comparison

RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS) has a higher volatility of 1.32% compared to iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF (LDRH) at 0.69%. This indicates that RIGS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LDRH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RIGSLDRHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.32%

0.69%

+0.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.74%

1.97%

+2.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.33%

2.61%

+6.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.50%

3.52%

+3.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.75%

3.52%

+4.23%

RIGS vs. LDRH - Expense Ratio Comparison

RIGS has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than LDRH's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

RIGS vs. LDRH - Dividend Comparison

RIGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.88%, less than LDRH's 7.00% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LDRH
iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF
7.00%6.41%1.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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 LDRH have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RIGS has higher volatility (1.32%) compared to LDRH (0.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIGS dropped -15.31% vs LDRH's -3.17%.

On 1-year performance, LDRH leads with 6.43% vs 3.91% for RIGS. On fees, LDRH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, LDRH has been the lower-risk option at 0.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LDRH has performed better with a 6.43% return vs 3.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LDRH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for RIGS.

LDRH has the higher dividend yield at 7.00%, compared with 4.88% for RIGS.

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RIGS and 0.35% for LDRH.

LDRH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RIGS and LDRH

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