RTH vs. AUSF

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) and AUSF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RTH is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while AUSF is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RTH returned 9.69%/yr vs 13.35%/yr for AUSF. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RTH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for AUSF.

Performance

RTH vs. AUSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RTH achieves a 4.33% return, which is significantly lower than AUSF's 9.27% return.

RTH

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -1.59%
• YTD: 4.33%
• 6M: 2.84%
• 1Y: 12.87%
• 3Y*: 16.16%
• 5Y*: 9.69%
• 10Y*: 14.35%

AUSF

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 2.94%
• YTD: 9.27%
• 6M: 8.68%
• 1Y: 17.75%
• 3Y*: 19.94%
• 5Y*: 13.35%
• 10Y*: —

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

RTH vs. AUSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	4.33%	12.36%	20.02%	20.07%	-17.67%	24.94%	31.62%	29.06%	-13.43%
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF	9.27%	13.69%	16.05%	22.26%	-0.18%	27.48%	1.27%	24.06%	-11.18%

Correlation

The correlation between RTH and AUSF is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2018	0.66

The correlation between RTH and AUSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

RTH vs. AUSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RTH	AUSF
Consumer Cyclical	57.2%	9.3%
Consumer Defensive	26.8%	7.8%
Healthcare	13.4%	11.4%
Industrials	2.6%	14.4%
Basic Materials	-	2.6%
Communication Services	-	8.6%
Energy	-	3.2%
Financial Services	-	18.4%
Real Estate	-	4.6%
Technology	-	15.3%
Utilities	-	4.4%

Return for Risk

RTH vs. AUSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTH

RTH Risk / Return Rank: 32
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 29
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 36

AUSF

AUSF Risk / Return Rank: 57
AUSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
AUSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
AUSF Omega Ratio Rank: 52
AUSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
AUSF Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

RTH vs. AUSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF). 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.

	RTH	AUSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	1.65	-0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.52	2.38	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.28	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.50	2.86	-1.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.99	8.29	-3.30

RTH vs. AUSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the AUSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTH and AUSF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RTH vs. AUSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTH drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, roughly equal to the maximum AUSF drawdown of -44.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTH and AUSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RTH	AUSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.32%	-44.25%	+1.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.83%	-5.84%	-1.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.80%	-12.29%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.00%	-14.23%	-10.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.58%	0.00%	-3.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.34%	-4.21%	-3.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	2.02%	+0.33%

Volatility

RTH vs. AUSF - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) has a higher volatility of 3.85% compared to Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) at 2.70%. This indicates that RTH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RTH	AUSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.85%	2.70%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.28%	6.72%	+2.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.09%	10.14%	+1.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.81%	13.66%	+3.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.54%	19.04%	-1.50%

RTH vs. AUSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than AUSF's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

RTH vs. AUSF - Dividend Comparison

RTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than AUSF's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF	2.69%	2.78%	2.63%	1.83%	2.51%	2.22%	2.95%	4.02%	1.46%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	0.93%	0.97%	0.77%	1.07%	1.16%	0.78%	0.64%	0.91%	1.05%	1.56%	1.84%	2.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RTH and AUSF in my portfolio?

RTH and AUSF have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RTH or AUSF?

RTH has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to AUSF (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs AUSF's -44.25%.

Which ETF is better, RTH or AUSF?

On 5-year performance, AUSF leads with 13.35% vs 9.69% for RTH. On fees, AUSF is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 2.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RTH or AUSF?

Over the 5-year period, AUSF has performed better with a 13.35% return vs 9.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RTH or AUSF?

AUSF is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RTH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RTH or AUSF?

AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 0.93% for RTH.

What is the main difference between RTH and AUSF?

RTH is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while AUSF is Mid Cap Value Equities. RTH tracks MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while AUSF tracks Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RTH and 0.27% for AUSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.65 vs 0.97), 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.