RMRC vs. CLSE

Last updated Jul 10, 2026

RMRC (ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF) and CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RMRC is a Actively Managed fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts, while CLSE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners. Both are actively managed. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMRC charges 0.60%/yr vs 1.52%/yr for CLSE.

Performance

RMRC vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF (RMRC) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

RMRC

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 1.48%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSE

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 1.40%
• 6M: 23.31%
• YTD: 24.44%
• 1Y: 46.56%
• 3Y*: 30.92%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMRC vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
RMRC ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF	2.27%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	19.59%

Correlation

The correlation between RMRC and CLSE is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2026	0.39

Return for Risk

RMRC vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMRC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 96
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

RMRC vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF (RMRC) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.

	RMRC	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	3.40	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	4.57	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.59	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	9.65	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	33.96	—

Drawdowns

RMRC vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMRC drawdown since its inception was -6.57%, smaller than the maximum CLSE drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMRC and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMRC	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.57%	-16.45%	+9.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.85%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.86%	-1.28%	+0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.70%	-3.55%	+1.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.38%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RMRC	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.98%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.76%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.37%	13.75%	-3.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.37%	13.91%	-3.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.37%	13.91%	-3.54%

RMRC vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMRC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSE's 1.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMRC vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

RMRC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, less than CLSE's 0.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.76%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%
RMRC ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMRC and CLSE in my portfolio?

RMRC and CLSE have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RMRC or CLSE?

On fees, RMRC is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMRC or CLSE?

RMRC is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.52% for CLSE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RMRC or CLSE?

CLSE has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.59% for RMRC.

What is the main difference between RMRC and CLSE?

RMRC is categorized as Actively Managed, while CLSE is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and Convergence Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for RMRC and 1.52% for CLSE.