RMIF vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RMIF (LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RMIF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RMIF returned 2.72% vs 3.94% for CSHP. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. RMIF charges 1.38%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

RMIF vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMIF achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.83% return.

RMIF

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: -0.77%
• 6M: -0.62%
• 1Y: 2.72%
• 3Y*: 4.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CSHP

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.83%
• 6M: 1.92%
• 1Y: 3.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMIF vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	-0.77%	4.36%	3.24%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.83%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between RMIF and CSHP is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	-0.01

The correlation between RMIF and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RMIF vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMIF

RMIF Risk / Return Rank: 28
RMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
RMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
RMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 30
RMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
RMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 25

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	RMIF	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.04	11.09	-10.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.50	27.60	-26.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	6.46	-5.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	65.45	-64.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.02	381.67	-378.65

RMIF vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMIF and CSHP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RMIF vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMIF drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMIF and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMIF	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.01%	-0.08%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.37%	-0.06%	-2.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.01%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.23%	-0.04%	-1.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.40%	-0.00%	-0.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	0.01%	+0.89%

Volatility

RMIF vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) has a higher volatility of 0.62% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that RMIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMIF	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.62%	0.16%	+0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.00%	0.27%	+1.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65%	0.36%	+2.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.59%	0.41%	+2.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.59%	0.41%	+2.18%

RMIF vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMIF has a 1.38% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMIF vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

RMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.29%, more than CSHP's 3.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.91%	5.39%	1.96%	0.00%
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	5.29%	5.70%	6.61%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMIF and CSHP in my portfolio?

RMIF and CSHP have a correlation of -0.16, 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 CSHP?

RMIF has higher volatility (0.62%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMIF dropped -3.01% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, RMIF or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.94% vs 2.72% for RMIF. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RMIF or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.94% return vs 2.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMIF or CSHP?

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 1.38% for RMIF.

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

RMIF has the higher dividend yield at 5.29%, compared with 3.91% for CSHP.

What is the main difference between RMIF and CSHP?

RMIF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.38% for RMIF and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.09 vs 1.04), 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.