RTH vs. BETZ
RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) and BETZ (Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF) are both Consumer Discretionary Equities funds - RTH tracks the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index while BETZ tracks the Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RTH returned 9.36%/yr vs -8.90%/yr for BETZ. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RTH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for BETZ.
Performance
RTH vs. BETZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RTH achieves a 1.87% return, which is significantly higher than BETZ's -10.38% 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%
BETZ
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- -1.15%
- YTD
- -10.38%
- 6M
- -8.91%
- 1Y
- -6.17%
- 3Y*
- 4.93%
- 5Y*
- -8.90%
- 10Y*
- —
RTH vs. BETZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF | 1.87% | 12.36% | 20.02% | 20.07% | -17.67% | 24.94% | 21.60% |
BETZ Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF | -10.38% | 15.75% | 10.22% | 21.17% | -42.02% | -3.91% | 60.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between RTH and BETZ is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020 | 0.57 |
Over the past year, the correlation between RTH and BETZ has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.57, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
RTH vs. BETZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RTH
BETZ
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
RTH
BETZ
Consumer Defensive
RTH
BETZ
-
Healthcare
RTH
BETZ
-
Industrials
RTH
BETZ
-
Basic Materials
RTH
-
BETZ
-
Communication Services
RTH
-
BETZ
Energy
RTH
-
BETZ
-
Financial Services
RTH
-
BETZ
Real Estate
RTH
-
BETZ
-
Technology
RTH
-
BETZ
Utilities
RTH
-
BETZ
-
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
RTH vs. BETZ — Risk / Return Rank
RTH
BETZ
RTH vs. BETZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ). 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 | BETZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.65 | -0.30 | +0.95 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.04 | -0.29 | +1.33 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | 0.97 | +0.15 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.00 | -0.21 | +1.21 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.46 | -0.36 | +3.82 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RTH | BETZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.65 | -0.30 | +0.95 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 | -0.33 | +0.89 |
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 | 0.13 | +0.37 |
Drawdowns
RTH vs. BETZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RTH drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, smaller than the maximum BETZ drawdown of -60.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTH and BETZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RTH | BETZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.32% | -60.82% | +18.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.83% | -29.20% | +21.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.80% | -29.20% | +15.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.00% | -60.35% | +35.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.00% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.85% | -39.37% | +33.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.34% | -33.81% | +26.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.26% | 16.99% | -14.73% |
Volatility
RTH vs. BETZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) is 3.83%, while Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) has a volatility of 5.29%. This indicates that RTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BETZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RTH | BETZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.83% | 5.29% | -1.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.22% | 15.81% | -6.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.07% | 20.49% | -8.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.81% | 26.94% | -10.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.54% | 27.94% | -10.40% |
RTH vs. BETZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
RTH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BETZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
RTH vs. BETZ - Dividend Comparison
RTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than BETZ's 5.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BETZ Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF | 5.10% | 4.57% | 0.86% | 0.00% | 0.66% | 0.00% | 0.28% | 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
RTH and BETZ have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BETZ has higher volatility (5.29%) compared to RTH (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs BETZ's -60.82%.
On 5-year performance, RTH leads with 9.36% vs -8.90% for BETZ. 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.
Over the 5-year period, RTH has performed better with a 9.36% return vs -8.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RTH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for BETZ.
BETZ has the higher dividend yield at 5.10%, compared with 0.95% for RTH.
RTH tracks MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while BETZ tracks Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Roundhill Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RTH and 0.75% for BETZ.
RTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.65 vs -0.30), 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.
Find the right allocation for RTH and BETZ
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