RUNN vs. CSHP
RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RUNN is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Running Oak Capital, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RUNN returned -3.62% vs 3.89% for CSHP. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
RUNN vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a -3.68% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.79% return.
RUNN
- 1D
- 1.06%
- 1M
- -1.57%
- YTD
- -3.68%
- 6M
- -5.23%
- 1Y
- -3.62%
- 3Y*
- 8.27%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CSHP
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 1.79%
- 6M
- 1.85%
- 1Y
- 3.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RUNN vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | -3.68% | 2.30% | 3.35% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.79% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between RUNN and CSHP is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024 | 0.07 |
The correlation between RUNN and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
RUNN vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
RUNN
CSHP
RUNN vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.
| RUNN | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -11.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -26.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 6.09 | -5.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.35 | 48.60 | -48.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.77 | 338.28 | -339.05 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RUNN vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RUNN drawdown since its inception was -16.83%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUNN and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RUNN | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.83% | -0.08% | -16.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.34% | -0.08% | -10.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.83% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.54% | -0.08% | -8.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.61% | -0.00% | -3.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.73% | 0.01% | +4.72% |
Volatility
RUNN vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) has a higher volatility of 3.93% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that RUNN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RUNN | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.93% | 0.16% | +3.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.96% | 0.27% | +9.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.04% | 0.36% | +12.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.80% | 0.41% | +13.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.80% | 0.41% | +13.39% |
RUNN vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
RUNN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
RUNN vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
RUNN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than CSHP's 3.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 3.92% | 5.39% | 1.96% | 0.00% |
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | 0.58% | 0.55% | 0.39% | 0.33% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RUNN and CSHP have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RUNN has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs CSHP's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.89% vs -3.62% for RUNN. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.89% return vs -3.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.92%, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.
RUNN is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Running Oak Capital and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.81 vs -0.28), 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 RUNN and CSHP
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