RSBY vs. RSST

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RSBY (Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF) and RSST (Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSBY is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Return Stacked, while RSST is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Return Stacked. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RSBY returned 20.50% vs 56.70% for RSST. At a correlation of -0.20, they often move in opposite directions. RSBY charges 0.98%/yr vs 1.04%/yr for RSST.

Performance

RSBY vs. RSST - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY) and Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF (RSST). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSBY achieves a 18.98% return, which is significantly lower than RSST's 21.45% return.

RSBY

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -2.54%
• YTD: 18.98%
• 6M: 14.31%
• 1Y: 20.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RSST

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: 7.80%
• YTD: 21.45%
• 6M: 23.86%
• 1Y: 56.70%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RSBY vs. RSST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	18.98%	-12.98%	-7.90%
RSST Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF	21.45%	19.91%	0.26%

Correlation

The correlation between RSBY and RSST is -0.20, 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	-0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2024	-0.20

RSBY vs. RSST - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSBY	RSST
Technology	53.7%	30.7%
Communication Services	15.8%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	6.0%
Healthcare	4.2%	8.2%
Industrials	3.1%	8.8%
Utilities	1.4%	2.7%
Basic Materials	1.1%	3.4%
Energy	0.6%	5.4%
Financial Services	0.2%	14.6%
Real Estate	0.1%	1.6%

Return for Risk

RSBY vs. RSST — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSBY

RSBY Risk / Return Rank: 49
RSBY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
RSBY Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
RSBY Omega Ratio Rank: 48
RSBY Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
RSBY Martin Ratio Rank: 39

RSST

RSST Risk / Return Rank: 76
RSST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RSST Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
RSST Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RSST Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
RSST Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

RSBY vs. RSST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY) and Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF (RSST). 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.

	RSBY	RSST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	2.57	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	3.05	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.43	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	4.87	-2.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.07	17.18	-11.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RSBY vs. RSST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSBY Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is lower than the RSST Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSBY and RSST, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RSBY	RSST	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.75	2.57	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.20	0.94	-1.14

Drawdowns

RSBY vs. RSST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSBY drawdown since its inception was -23.32%, smaller than the maximum RSST drawdown of -30.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSBY and RSST.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSBY	RSST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.32%	-30.80%	+7.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.95%	-11.71%	+3.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.09%	-0.95%	-5.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.79%	-6.03%	-7.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.39%	3.31%	+0.08%

Volatility

RSBY vs. RSST - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY) is 2.11%, while Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF (RSST) has a volatility of 4.16%. This indicates that RSBY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSBY	RSST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.11%	4.16%	-2.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.52%	15.34%	-6.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.80%	22.14%	-10.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.56%	24.16%	-10.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.56%	24.16%	-10.60%

RSBY vs. RSST - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSBY has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is lower than RSST's 1.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSBY vs. RSST - Dividend Comparison

RSBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, more than RSST's 0.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	1.74%	2.07%	2.29%	0.00%
RSST Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF	0.92%	1.12%	0.09%	0.93%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSBY and RSST in my portfolio?

RSBY and RSST have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSBY or RSST?

RSST has higher volatility (4.16%) compared to RSBY (2.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSBY dropped -23.32% vs RSST's -30.80%.

Which ETF is better, RSBY or RSST?

On 1-year performance, RSST leads with 56.70% vs 20.50% for RSBY. On fees, RSBY is cheaper at 0.98% per year. On volatility, RSBY has been the lower-risk option at 2.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSBY or RSST?

Over the 1-year period, RSST has performed better with a 56.70% return vs 20.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSBY or RSST?

RSBY is cheaper with a 0.98% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for RSST.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSBY or RSST?

RSBY has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.92% for RSST.

What is the main difference between RSBY and RSST?

RSBY is categorized as Multistrategy, while RSST is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for RSBY and 1.04% for RSST.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSST currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 1.75), 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.