RTH vs. BEDZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) and BEDZ (AdvisorShares Hotel ETF) are both Consumer Discretionary Equities funds. RTH is passively managed, while BEDZ is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RTH returned 9.36%/yr vs 7.24%/yr for BEDZ. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RTH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BEDZ.

Performance

RTH vs. BEDZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RTH achieves a 1.87% return, which is significantly lower than BEDZ's 5.11% return.

RTH

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: -4.91%
• YTD: 1.87%
• 6M: 1.10%
• 1Y: 7.77%
• 3Y*: 16.09%
• 5Y*: 9.36%
• 10Y*: 13.87%

BEDZ

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 3.89%
• YTD: 5.11%
• 6M: 9.59%
• 1Y: 19.45%
• 3Y*: 13.34%
• 5Y*: 7.24%
• 10Y*: —

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

RTH vs. BEDZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	1.87%	12.36%	20.02%	20.07%	-17.67%	13.39%
BEDZ AdvisorShares Hotel ETF	5.11%	3.46%	18.31%	23.88%	-13.40%	6.49%

Correlation

The correlation between RTH and BEDZ is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2021	0.57

The correlation between RTH and BEDZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

RTH vs. BEDZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RTH	BEDZ
Consumer Cyclical	56.4%	51.9%
Consumer Defensive	27.6%	-
Healthcare	13.5%	-
Industrials	2.5%	4.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	1.5%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	42.2%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RTH vs. BEDZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTH

RTH Risk / Return Rank: 21
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 18
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 25

BEDZ

BEDZ Risk / Return Rank: 27
BEDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
BEDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
BEDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 26
BEDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
BEDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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. BEDZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ). 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.

	RTH	BEDZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.65	0.96	-0.32
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.04	1.52	-0.48
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.17	-0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.00	1.57	-0.57
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.46	3.68	-0.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RTH vs. BEDZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is lower than the BEDZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTH and BEDZ, 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

	RTH	BEDZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65	0.96	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56	0.29	+0.27
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.32	+0.18

Drawdowns

RTH vs. BEDZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTH drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, which is greater than BEDZ's maximum drawdown of -29.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTH and BEDZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	RTH	BEDZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.32%	-29.70%	-12.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.83%	-12.06%	+4.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.80%	-28.31%	+14.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.00%	-29.70%	+4.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.85%	-0.27%	-5.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.34%	-8.09%	+0.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.26%	5.15%	-2.89%

Volatility

RTH vs. BEDZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) is 3.83%, while AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) has a volatility of 5.70%. This indicates that RTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BEDZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RTH	BEDZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.83%	5.70%	-1.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.22%	15.09%	-5.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.07%	20.29%	-8.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.81%	24.89%	-8.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.54%	24.85%	-7.31%

RTH vs. BEDZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BEDZ's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

RTH vs. BEDZ - Dividend Comparison

RTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than BEDZ's 2.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BEDZ AdvisorShares Hotel ETF	2.20%	2.31%	0.00%	1.67%	0.21%	0.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	0.95%	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 BEDZ in my portfolio?

RTH and BEDZ have a correlation of 0.50, 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 BEDZ?

BEDZ has higher volatility (5.70%) compared to RTH (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs BEDZ's -29.70%.

Which ETF is better, RTH or BEDZ?

On 5-year performance, RTH leads with 9.36% vs 7.24% for BEDZ. On fees, RTH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RTH has been the lower-risk option at 3.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RTH or BEDZ?

Over the 5-year period, RTH has performed better with a 9.36% return vs 7.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RTH or BEDZ?

RTH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BEDZ.

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

BEDZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.20%, compared with 0.95% for RTH.

What is the main difference between RTH and BEDZ?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and AdvisorShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RTH and 0.99% for BEDZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BEDZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.96 vs 0.65), 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.