PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RMIF vs. PSDM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RMIF vs. PSDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF (PSDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMIF achieves a -0.73% return, which is significantly lower than PSDM's 1.23% return.


RMIF

1D
0.08%
1M
0.22%
YTD
-0.73%
6M
-0.26%
1Y
3.22%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PSDM

1D
-0.10%
1M
0.20%
YTD
1.23%
6M
1.61%
1Y
5.16%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RMIF vs. PSDM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
RMIF
LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF
-0.73%4.36%7.00%2.90%
PSDM
PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF
1.23%6.16%5.48%3.96%

Correlation

The correlation between RMIF and PSDM is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2023

0.42

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

RMIF vs. PSDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMIF
RMIF Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
RMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
RMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
RMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
RMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank

PSDM
PSDM Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
PSDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PSDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
PSDM Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
PSDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
PSDM Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

RMIF vs. PSDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) and PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF (PSDM). 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.


RMIFPSDMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.23

2.96

-1.73

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.79

5.06

-3.26

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.64

-0.41

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.35

4.35

-3.00

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.76

19.69

-15.94

RMIF vs. PSDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the PSDM Sharpe Ratio of 2.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMIF and PSDM, 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


RMIFPSDMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.23

2.96

-1.73

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.92

2.97

-1.05

Drawdowns

RMIF vs. PSDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMIF drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, which is greater than PSDM's maximum drawdown of -1.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMIF and PSDM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RMIFPSDMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.01%

-1.19%

-1.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.37%

-1.19%

-1.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.19%

-0.16%

-1.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.38%

-0.17%

-0.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.85%

0.26%

+0.59%

Volatility

RMIF vs. PSDM - Volatility Comparison

LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) has a higher volatility of 0.74% compared to PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF (PSDM) at 0.53%. This indicates that RMIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PSDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RMIFPSDMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.74%

0.53%

+0.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.99%

1.28%

+0.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.62%

1.75%

+0.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.59%

2.01%

+0.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.59%

2.01%

+0.58%

RMIF vs. PSDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMIF has a 1.38% expense ratio, which is higher than PSDM's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

RMIF vs. PSDM - Dividend Comparison

RMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.29%, more than PSDM's 4.85% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
PSDM
PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF
4.85%4.57%5.17%2.91%
RMIF
LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF
5.29%5.70%6.61%3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions


RMIF and PSDM have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RMIF has higher volatility (0.74%) compared to PSDM (0.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMIF dropped -3.01% vs PSDM's -1.19%.

On 1-year performance, PSDM leads with 5.16% vs 3.22% for RMIF. On fees, PSDM is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, PSDM has been the lower-risk option at 0.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, PSDM has performed better with a 5.16% return vs 3.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PSDM is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.38% for RMIF.

RMIF has the higher dividend yield at 5.29%, compared with 4.85% for PSDM.

They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 1.38% for RMIF and 0.40% for PSDM.

PSDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.96 vs 1.23), 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 RMIF and PSDM

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