RNMN vs. BTAL
RNMN (RiverNorth Market Neutral ETF) and BTAL (AGF U.S. Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund) are both Equity Market Neutral funds. Both are actively managed. Their -0.08 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. RNMN charges 0.90%/yr vs 1.40%/yr for BTAL.
Performance
RNMN vs. BTAL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
RNMN
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- —
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
BTAL
- 1D
- 2.58%
- 1M
- 13.29%
- 6M
- -8.76%
- YTD
- -11.74%
- 1Y
- -20.76%
- 3Y*
- -7.47%
- 5Y*
- -3.45%
- 10Y*
- -3.94%
- ALL TIME*
- -3.55%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $9.13M | $8.16M | $7.97M | |
| $624.98 | $26.76K | $26.76K |
RNMN vs. BTAL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
RNMN RiverNorth Market Neutral ETF | -0.10% |
BTAL AGF U.S. Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund | 7.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between RNMN and BTAL is -0.08, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2026 | -0.08 |
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
RNMN vs. BTAL — Risk / Return Rank
RNMN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BTAL
RNMN vs. BTAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverNorth Market Neutral ETF (RNMN) and AGF U.S. Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund (BTAL). 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.
| RNMN | BTAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 0.87 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.60 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -1.10 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RNMN vs. BTAL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RNMN drawdown since its inception was -0.47%, smaller than the maximum BTAL drawdown of -52.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNMN and BTAL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RNMN | BTAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.47% | -52.70% | +52.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -34.57% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -47.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -47.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -52.70% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.40% | -44.99% | +44.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.29% | -22.23% | +21.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 18.94% | — |
Volatility
RNMN vs. BTAL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RNMN | BTAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 7.02% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 17.69% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.98% | 23.65% | -21.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.98% | 19.35% | -17.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.98% | 17.44% | -15.46% |
RNMN vs. BTAL - Expense Ratio Comparison
RNMN has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than BTAL's 1.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
RNMN vs. BTAL - Dividend Comparison
RNMN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BTAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BTAL AGF U.S. Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund | 2.82% | 2.49% | 3.49% | 6.14% | 1.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.88% | 0.39% |
RNMN RiverNorth Market Neutral ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RNMN and BTAL have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RNMN is cheaper at 0.90% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RNMN is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.40% for BTAL.
BTAL has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 0.00% for RNMN.
They also come from different issuers: RiverNorth and AGF. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for RNMN and 1.40% for BTAL.
Find the right allocation for RNMN and BTAL
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