RMDFX vs. TNMAX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RMDFX (Aspiriant Defensive Allocation Fund) and TNMAX (1290 Multi-Alternative Strategies Fund Class A) are both Multistrategy funds. Over the past 10 years, RMDFX returned 5.40%/yr vs 3.97%/yr for TNMAX. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RMDFX charges 0.18%/yr vs 1.52%/yr for TNMAX.

Performance

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aspiriant Defensive Allocation Fund (RMDFX) and 1290 Multi-Alternative Strategies Fund Class A (TNMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMDFX achieves a 7.32% return, which is significantly lower than TNMAX's 10.63% return. Over the past 10 years, RMDFX has outperformed TNMAX with an annualized return of 5.40%, while TNMAX has yielded a comparatively lower 3.97% annualized return.

RMDFX

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: 2.08%
• YTD: 7.32%
• 6M: 8.74%
• 1Y: 19.98%
• 3Y*: 11.18%
• 5Y*: 5.28%
• 10Y*: 5.40%

TNMAX

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 0.96%
• YTD: 10.63%
• 6M: 11.07%
• 1Y: 20.88%
• 3Y*: 12.42%
• 5Y*: 4.42%
• 10Y*: 3.97%

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

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RMDFX Aspiriant Defensive Allocation Fund	7.32%	18.85%	1.45%	8.01%	-6.84%	4.20%	5.10%	11.50%	-4.89%	9.41%
TNMAX 1290 Multi-Alternative Strategies Fund Class A	10.63%	13.21%	8.95%	5.08%	-11.31%	3.00%	4.28%	7.38%	-4.34%	3.91%

Correlation

The correlation between RMDFX and TNMAX is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2016	0.71

The correlation between RMDFX and TNMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RMDFX vs. TNMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMDFX

RMDFX Risk / Return Rank: 95
RMDFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
RMDFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
RMDFX Omega Ratio Rank: 97
RMDFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
RMDFX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

TNMAX

TNMAX Risk / Return Rank: 89
TNMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
TNMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
TNMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 87
TNMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TNMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aspiriant Defensive Allocation Fund (RMDFX) and 1290 Multi-Alternative Strategies Fund Class A (TNMAX). 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.

	RMDFX	TNMAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.33	2.85	+1.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.13	3.78	+2.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.97	1.60	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.79	5.76	-0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.77	21.97	-3.20
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMDFX Sharpe Ratio is 4.33, which is higher than the TNMAX Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMDFX and TNMAX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RMDFX	TNMAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.33	2.85	+1.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84	0.58	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.87	0.56	+0.31
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.84	0.60	+0.24

Drawdowns

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMDFX drawdown since its inception was -15.96%, smaller than the maximum TNMAX drawdown of -17.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMDFX and TNMAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMDFX	TNMAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.96%	-17.29%	+1.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.19%	-3.64%	-0.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.79%	-7.27%	+1.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.63%	-16.46%	+1.83%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-15.96%	-17.29%	+1.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.52%	+0.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.33%	-4.03%	+0.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.07%	0.95%	+0.12%

Volatility

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Volatility Comparison

Aspiriant Defensive Allocation Fund (RMDFX) and 1290 Multi-Alternative Strategies Fund Class A (TNMAX) have volatilities of 1.47% and 1.54%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMDFX	TNMAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.47%	1.54%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.96%	6.19%	-2.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.64%	7.39%	-2.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.34%	7.66%	-1.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.23%	7.12%	-0.89%

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMDFX has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than TNMAX's 1.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMDFX vs. TNMAX - Dividend Comparison

RMDFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.32%, more than TNMAX's 1.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
RMDFX Aspiriant Defensive Allocation Fund	4.32%	4.63%	0.00%	3.69%	0.78%	5.37%	2.28%	3.78%	4.11%	2.16%	1.16%
TNMAX 1290 Multi-Alternative Strategies Fund Class A	1.75%	1.94%	1.33%	3.12%	2.59%	10.42%	0.55%	1.92%	0.97%	0.37%	0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMDFX and TNMAX in my portfolio?

RMDFX and TNMAX have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RMDFX or TNMAX?

TNMAX has higher volatility (1.54%) compared to RMDFX (1.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMDFX dropped -15.96% vs TNMAX's -17.29%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RMDFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.33 vs 2.85), 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.