RTH vs. BETZ

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

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 8.76%/yr vs -5.90%/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

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RTH achieves a 3.45% return, which is significantly higher than BETZ's -7.53% return.

RTH

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: -0.84%
• 6M: -2.39%
• YTD: 3.45%
• 1Y: 8.61%
• 3Y*: 14.56%
• 5Y*: 8.76%
• 10Y*: 13.71%

BETZ

• 1D: -1.07%
• 1M: -3.67%
• 6M: -3.15%
• YTD: -7.53%
• 1Y: -15.98%
• 3Y*: 3.39%
• 5Y*: -5.90%
• 10Y*: —

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

RTH vs. BETZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	3.45%	12.36%	20.02%	20.07%	-17.67%	24.94%	20.61%
BETZ Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF	-7.53%	15.75%	10.22%	21.17%	-42.02%	-3.91%	65.99%

Correlation

The correlation between RTH and BETZ is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.47
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.57

Over the past year, the correlation between RTH and BETZ has dropped to 0.31 - 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	57.2%	96.0%
Consumer Defensive	26.8%	-
Healthcare	13.4%	-
Industrials	2.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	1.1%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	2.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RTH vs. BETZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTH

RTH Risk / Return Rank: 25
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 22
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 29

BETZ

BETZ Risk / Return Rank: 4
BETZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
BETZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
BETZ Omega Ratio Rank: 4
BETZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
BETZ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. 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.

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	BETZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.69	-0.77	+1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.08	-1.00	+2.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	0.89	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.10	-0.55	+1.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.20	-0.87	+4.08

RTH vs. BETZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.69, which is higher than the BETZ Sharpe Ratio of -0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTH and BETZ, 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. 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.

Drawdown Indicators

	RTH	BETZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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%	-59.79%	+34.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.39%	-37.44%	+33.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.33%	-33.86%	+26.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.70%	18.31%	-15.61%

Volatility

RTH vs. BETZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) is 4.40%, while Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) has a volatility of 5.53%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	RTH	BETZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.40%	5.53%	-1.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.78%	16.76%	-6.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.51%	20.75%	-8.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.88%	26.98%	-10.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.57%	27.88%	-10.31%

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 0.94%, less than BETZ's 4.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BETZ Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF	4.95%	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	0.94%	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 BETZ in my portfolio?

RTH and BETZ have a correlation of 0.31, 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 BETZ?

BETZ has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to RTH (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs BETZ's -60.82%.

Which ETF is better, RTH or BETZ?

On 5-year performance, RTH leads with 8.76% vs -5.90% for BETZ. On fees, RTH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RTH has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RTH or BETZ?

Over the 5-year period, RTH has performed better with a 8.76% return vs -5.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RTH or BETZ?

RTH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for BETZ.

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

BETZ has the higher dividend yield at 4.95%, compared with 0.94% for RTH.

What is the main difference between RTH and BETZ?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.69 vs -0.77), 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.