RMIF vs. MSTQ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RMIF (LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF) and MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RMIF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors, while MSTQ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RMIF returned 4.86%/yr vs 21.44%/yr for MSTQ. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RMIF charges 1.38%/yr vs 1.59%/yr for MSTQ.

Performance

RMIF vs. MSTQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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 MSTQ's 12.49% return.

RMIF

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

MSTQ

• 1D: -2.91%
• 1M: -0.78%
• YTD: 12.49%
• 6M: 10.94%
• 1Y: 26.47%
• 3Y*: 21.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMIF vs. MSTQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	-0.77%	4.36%	7.00%	4.09%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	12.49%	20.57%	19.58%	13.33%

Correlation

The correlation between RMIF and MSTQ is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023	0.54

The correlation between RMIF and MSTQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RMIF vs. MSTQ — 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

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 48
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 51
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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. MSTQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.04	1.68	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.50	2.24	-0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.30	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	2.15	-0.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.02	6.57	-3.55

RMIF vs. MSTQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is lower than the MSTQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMIF and MSTQ, 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. MSTQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMIF drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, smaller than the maximum MSTQ drawdown of -31.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMIF and MSTQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMIF	MSTQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.01%	-31.05%	+28.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.37%	-12.39%	+10.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.01%	-15.22%	+12.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.23%	-4.38%	+3.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.40%	-8.55%	+8.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	4.04%	-3.14%

Volatility

RMIF vs. MSTQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) is 0.62%, while LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a volatility of 7.78%. This indicates that RMIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMIF	MSTQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.62%	7.78%	-7.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.00%	12.35%	-10.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65%	15.87%	-13.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.59%	19.06%	-16.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.59%	19.06%	-16.47%

RMIF vs. MSTQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMIF has a 1.38% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTQ's 1.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMIF vs. MSTQ - Dividend Comparison

RMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.29%, less than MSTQ's 12.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	12.42%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF	5.29%	5.70%	6.61%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMIF and MSTQ in my portfolio?

RMIF and MSTQ have a correlation of 0.62, 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 MSTQ?

MSTQ has higher volatility (7.78%) compared to RMIF (0.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMIF dropped -3.01% vs MSTQ's -31.05%.

Which ETF is better, RMIF or MSTQ?

On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 21.44% vs 4.86% for RMIF. On fees, RMIF is cheaper at 1.38% per year. On volatility, RMIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RMIF or MSTQ?

Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 21.44% return vs 4.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMIF or MSTQ?

RMIF is cheaper with a 1.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

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

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 12.42%, compared with 5.29% for RMIF.

What is the main difference between RMIF and MSTQ?

RMIF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while MSTQ is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 1.38% for RMIF and 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 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.