RMIF vs. CRDT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RMIF (LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF) and CRDT (Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RMIF returned 3.05% vs 2.41% for CRDT. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMIF charges 1.38%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CRDT.

Performance

RMIF vs. CRDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF (CRDT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMIF achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than CRDT's 2.58% return.

RMIF

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: -0.85%
• 6M: -0.51%
• 1Y: 3.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CRDT

• 1D: -1.49%
• 1M: 1.76%
• YTD: 2.58%
• 6M: 3.24%
• 1Y: 2.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMIF vs. CRDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	-0.85%	4.36%	7.00%	3.92%
CRDT Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF	2.58%	-0.67%	5.19%	5.16%

Correlation

The correlation between RMIF and CRDT is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 2023	0.38

The correlation between RMIF and CRDT shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (all time) to 0.49 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RMIF vs. CRDT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RMIF	CRDT
Utilities	76.7%	-
Healthcare	13.8%	-
Technology	9.4%	-
Communication Services	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.5%
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	7.0%

Return for Risk

RMIF vs. CRDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMIF

RMIF Risk / Return Rank: 30
RMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
RMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
RMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 33
RMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
RMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 26

CRDT

CRDT Risk / Return Rank: 13
CRDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
CRDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
CRDT Omega Ratio Rank: 12
CRDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
CRDT Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

RMIF vs. CRDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF (CRDT). 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.

	RMIF	CRDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	0.28	+0.89
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.70	0.43	+1.27
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.06	+0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.30	0.34	+0.96
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.58	1.01	+2.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RMIF vs. CRDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is higher than the CRDT Sharpe Ratio of 0.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMIF and CRDT, 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

	RMIF	CRDT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.17	0.28	+0.89
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.90	0.59	+1.31

Drawdowns

RMIF vs. CRDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMIF drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, smaller than the maximum CRDT drawdown of -9.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMIF and CRDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMIF	CRDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.01%	-9.80%	+6.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.37%	-7.18%	+4.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.31%	-2.66%	+1.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.38%	-2.32%	+1.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.86%	2.40%	-1.54%

Volatility

RMIF vs. CRDT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) is 0.72%, while Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF (CRDT) has a volatility of 3.75%. This indicates that RMIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CRDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMIF	CRDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.72%	3.75%	-3.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.99%	7.64%	-5.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63%	8.77%	-6.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.59%	7.05%	-4.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.59%	7.05%	-4.46%

RMIF vs. CRDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMIF has a 1.38% expense ratio, which is higher than CRDT's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMIF vs. CRDT - Dividend Comparison

RMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.30%, less than CRDT's 6.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CRDT Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF	6.29%	7.04%	7.29%	2.59%
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	5.30%	5.70%	6.61%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMIF and CRDT in my portfolio?

RMIF and CRDT have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RMIF or CRDT?

CRDT has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to RMIF (0.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMIF dropped -3.01% vs CRDT's -9.80%.

Which ETF is better, RMIF or CRDT?

On 1-year performance, RMIF leads with 3.05% vs 2.41% for CRDT. On fees, CRDT is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, RMIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RMIF or CRDT?

Over the 1-year period, RMIF has performed better with a 3.05% return vs 2.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMIF or CRDT?

CRDT is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.38% for RMIF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RMIF or CRDT?

CRDT has the higher dividend yield at 6.29%, compared with 5.30% for RMIF.

What is the main difference between RMIF and CRDT?

They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 1.38% for RMIF and 0.50% for CRDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RMIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 vs 0.28), 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.