PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RTH vs. FLTR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RTH vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with RTH having a 1.87% return and FLTR slightly higher at 1.91%. Over the past 10 years, RTH has outperformed FLTR with an annualized return of 13.87%, while FLTR has yielded a comparatively lower 3.51% annualized 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%

FLTR

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.46%
YTD
1.91%
6M
2.40%
1Y
5.30%
3Y*
6.10%
5Y*
4.49%
10Y*
3.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RTH vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RTH
VanEck Vectors Retail ETF
1.87%12.36%20.02%20.07%-17.67%24.94%31.62%29.06%3.87%22.45%
FLTR
VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF
1.91%5.22%7.38%7.41%0.74%0.55%1.44%5.70%0.30%2.80%

Correlation

The correlation between RTH and FLTR is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.20

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.17

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2011

0.10

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. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTH
RTH Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank

FLTR
FLTR Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
FLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
FLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.


RTHFLTRDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.65

6.77

-6.12

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.04

12.78

-11.73

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.12

3.15

-2.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.00

16.96

-15.96

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.46

101.23

-97.77

RTH vs. FLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is lower than the FLTR Sharpe Ratio of 6.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTH and FLTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RTHFLTRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.65

6.77

-6.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

2.11

-1.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

0.70

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.53

-0.03

Drawdowns

RTH vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTH drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, which is greater than FLTR's maximum drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTH and FLTR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RTHFLTRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.32%

-17.84%

-24.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.83%

-0.31%

-7.52%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.80%

-1.93%

-11.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.00%

-3.06%

-21.94%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.00%

-17.84%

-7.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.85%

-0.04%

-5.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.34%

-0.67%

-6.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.26%

0.05%

+2.21%

Volatility

RTH vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) has a higher volatility of 3.83% compared to VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.25%. This indicates that RTH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RTHFLTRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.83%

0.25%

+3.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.22%

0.62%

+8.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.07%

0.79%

+11.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.81%

2.13%

+14.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.54%

5.00%

+12.54%

RTH vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTR's 0.14% expense ratio.


Dividends

RTH vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison

RTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than FLTR's 4.73% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLTR
VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF
4.73%4.97%5.93%6.07%2.29%0.63%1.49%3.05%2.67%1.69%1.16%0.71%
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 FLTR 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.

RTH has higher volatility (3.83%) compared to FLTR (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs FLTR's -17.84%.

On 10-year performance, RTH leads with 13.87% vs 3.51% for FLTR. On fees, FLTR is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RTH has performed better with a 13.87% return vs 3.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLTR is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RTH.

FLTR has the higher dividend yield at 4.73%, compared with 0.95% for RTH.

RTH is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while FLTR is Corporate Bonds. RTH tracks MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while FLTR tracks MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RTH and 0.14% for FLTR.

FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.77 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RTH and FLTR

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