PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RNWZ vs. QBER
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RNWZ vs. QBER - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) and TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RNWZ achieves a 16.28% return, which is significantly higher than QBER's -0.96% return.


RNWZ

1D
0.20%
1M
-2.61%
YTD
16.28%
6M
16.86%
1Y
38.19%
3Y*
12.63%
5Y*
10Y*

QBER

1D
-0.13%
1M
-0.38%
YTD
-0.96%
6M
-0.37%
1Y
-0.85%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RNWZ vs. QBER - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
RNWZ
TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF
16.28%36.33%-5.15%
QBER
TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF
-0.96%0.25%0.04%

Correlation

The correlation between RNWZ and QBER is -0.22, 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

-0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024

-0.20

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

RNWZ vs. QBER — Risk / Return Rank

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

RNWZ
RNWZ Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
RNWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RNWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
RNWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
RNWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
RNWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

QBER
QBER Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
QBER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBER Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBER Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
QBER Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBER Martin Ratio Rank: 55
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.

RNWZ vs. QBER - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) and TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER). 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.


RNWZQBERDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.78

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

0.96

+0.49

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.33

-0.36

+6.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.60

-0.88

+16.48

RNWZ vs. QBER - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNWZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is higher than the QBER Sharpe Ratio of -0.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNWZ and QBER, 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


RNWZQBERDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.55

-0.23

+2.78

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

-0.05

+0.67

Drawdowns

RNWZ vs. QBER - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNWZ drawdown since its inception was -24.90%, which is greater than QBER's maximum drawdown of -5.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNWZ and QBER.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RNWZQBERDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.90%

-5.72%

-19.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.06%

-2.35%

-3.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.46%

-5.68%

+1.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.19%

-4.72%

-2.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.45%

0.97%

+1.48%

Volatility

RNWZ vs. QBER - Volatility Comparison

TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) has a higher volatility of 5.06% compared to TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER) at 0.87%. This indicates that RNWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBER based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RNWZQBERDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.06%

0.87%

+4.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.86%

2.85%

+9.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.06%

3.64%

+11.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.99%

6.40%

+10.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.99%

6.40%

+10.59%

RNWZ vs. QBER - Expense Ratio Comparison

RNWZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than QBER's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

RNWZ vs. QBER - Dividend Comparison

RNWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.93%, less than QBER's 3.29% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
QBER
TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF
3.29%3.26%1.35%0.00%0.00%
RNWZ
TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF
1.93%2.12%2.36%3.87%0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


RNWZ and QBER have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RNWZ has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to QBER (0.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNWZ dropped -24.90% vs QBER's -5.72%.

On 1-year performance, RNWZ leads with 38.19% vs -0.85% for QBER. On fees, RNWZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, QBER has been the lower-risk option at 0.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, RNWZ has performed better with a 38.19% return vs -0.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RNWZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBER.

QBER has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 1.93% for RNWZ.

RNWZ is categorized as Energy Equities, while QBER is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for RNWZ and 0.79% for QBER.

RNWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs -0.23), 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 RNWZ and QBER

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