PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RPHS vs. INCM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RPHS vs. INCM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RPHS achieves a 6.79% return, which is significantly higher than INCM's 6.45% return.


RPHS

1D
-0.44%
1M
4.34%
YTD
6.79%
6M
6.98%
1Y
19.53%
3Y*
15.26%
5Y*
10Y*

INCM

1D
-0.48%
1M
0.70%
YTD
6.45%
6M
6.84%
1Y
15.73%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RPHS vs. INCM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
RPHS
Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF
6.79%11.74%17.84%8.20%
INCM
Franklin Income Focus ETF
6.45%13.07%6.80%5.76%

Correlation

The correlation between RPHS and INCM is 0.56, 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

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023

0.56

The correlation between RPHS and INCM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

RPHS vs. INCM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RPHS
INCM

Technology

33.6%
2.4%

Financial Services

12.4%
8.2%

Communication Services

10.5%
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
1.5%

Healthcare

9.5%
2.6%

Industrials

8.5%
1.9%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
6.7%

Energy

4.0%
3.8%

Utilities

2.5%
4.9%

Real Estate

2.0%
0.0%

Basic Materials

1.9%
1.9%

Technology

RPHS
33.6%
INCM
2.4%

Financial Services

RPHS
12.4%
INCM
8.2%

Communication Services

RPHS
10.5%
INCM
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

RPHS
10.0%
INCM
1.5%

Healthcare

RPHS
9.5%
INCM
2.6%

Industrials

RPHS
8.5%
INCM
1.9%

Consumer Defensive

RPHS
5.3%
INCM
6.7%

Energy

RPHS
4.0%
INCM
3.8%

Utilities

RPHS
2.5%
INCM
4.9%

Real Estate

RPHS
2.0%
INCM
0.0%

Basic Materials

RPHS
1.9%
INCM
1.9%

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

RPHS vs. INCM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RPHS
RPHS Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
RPHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RPHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
RPHS Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
RPHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
RPHS Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

INCM
INCM Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
INCM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INCM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
INCM Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
INCM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
INCM Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

RPHS vs. INCM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). 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.


RPHSINCMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.57

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.51

4.95

-2.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.09

20.86

-10.76

RPHS vs. INCM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RPHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is lower than the INCM Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RPHS and INCM, 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


RPHSINCMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.87

3.01

-1.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.65

1.51

-0.85

Drawdowns

RPHS vs. INCM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RPHS drawdown since its inception was -15.77%, which is greater than INCM's maximum drawdown of -7.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RPHS and INCM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RPHSINCMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.77%

-7.84%

-7.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.81%

-3.19%

-4.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.44%

-0.75%

+0.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.97%

-1.09%

-4.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.94%

0.76%

+1.18%

Volatility

RPHS vs. INCM - Volatility Comparison

Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) has a higher volatility of 2.55% compared to Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) at 1.66%. This indicates that RPHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INCM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RPHSINCMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.55%

1.66%

+0.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.32%

3.82%

+3.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.48%

5.25%

+5.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.37%

7.23%

+4.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.37%

7.23%

+4.14%

RPHS vs. INCM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RPHS has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than INCM's 0.38% expense ratio.


Dividends

RPHS vs. INCM - Dividend Comparison

RPHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.42%, more than INCM's 5.08% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
INCM
Franklin Income Focus ETF
5.08%4.96%5.06%3.01%0.00%
RPHS
Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF
10.42%11.13%3.68%5.23%1.29%

Frequently Asked Questions


RPHS and INCM have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RPHS has higher volatility (2.55%) compared to INCM (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RPHS dropped -15.77% vs INCM's -7.84%.

On 1-year performance, RPHS leads with 19.53% vs 15.73% for INCM. On fees, INCM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, INCM has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, RPHS has performed better with a 19.53% return vs 15.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

INCM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for RPHS.

RPHS has the higher dividend yield at 10.42%, compared with 5.08% for INCM.

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for RPHS and 0.38% for INCM.

INCM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 1.87), 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 RPHS and INCM

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