RUNN vs. CTEF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) and CTEF (Castellan Targeted Equity ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RUNN returned -3.73% vs 81.04% for CTEF. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CTEF.

Performance

RUNN vs. CTEF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a -4.70% return, which is significantly lower than CTEF's 36.91% return.

RUNN

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -2.61%
• YTD: -4.70%
• 6M: -5.86%
• 1Y: -3.73%
• 3Y*: 7.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CTEF

• 1D: -2.45%
• 1M: 13.53%
• YTD: 36.91%
• 6M: 33.85%
• 1Y: 81.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RUNN vs. CTEF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	-4.70%	1.61%
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	36.91%	33.10%

Correlation

The correlation between RUNN and CTEF is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.47

Return for Risk

RUNN vs. CTEF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 6
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 5

CTEF

CTEF Risk / Return Rank: 93
CTEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CTEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
CTEF Omega Ratio Rank: 92
CTEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CTEF Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

RUNN vs. CTEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF). 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	CTEF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.29	3.60	-3.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.33	4.48	-4.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.57	-0.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.36	5.43	-5.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.79	25.12	-25.92

RUNN vs. CTEF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUNN Sharpe Ratio is -0.29, which is lower than the CTEF Sharpe Ratio of 3.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUNN and CTEF, 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

RUNN vs. CTEF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUNN drawdown since its inception was -16.83%, which is greater than CTEF's maximum drawdown of -15.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUNN and CTEF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUNN	CTEF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.83%	-15.00%	-1.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-15.00%	+4.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.50%	-2.45%	-7.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.61%	-1.75%	-1.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.70%	3.24%	+1.46%

Volatility

RUNN vs. CTEF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) is 3.89%, while Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF) has a volatility of 9.15%. This indicates that RUNN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTEF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RUNN	CTEF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.89%	9.15%	-5.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.90%	19.03%	-9.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.04%	22.64%	-9.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.80%	22.56%	-8.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.80%	22.56%	-8.76%

RUNN vs. CTEF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RUNN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than CTEF's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

RUNN vs. CTEF - Dividend Comparison

RUNN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, more than CTEF's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	0.06%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.58%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RUNN and CTEF in my portfolio?

RUNN and CTEF have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RUNN or CTEF?

CTEF has higher volatility (9.15%) compared to RUNN (3.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs CTEF's -15.00%.

Which ETF is better, RUNN or CTEF?

On 1-year performance, CTEF leads with 81.04% vs -3.73% for RUNN. On fees, CTEF is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RUNN or CTEF?

Over the 1-year period, CTEF has performed better with a 81.04% return vs -3.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUNN or CTEF?

CTEF is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RUNN or CTEF?

RUNN has the higher dividend yield at 0.58%, compared with 0.06% for CTEF.

What is the main difference between RUNN and CTEF?

They also come from different issuers: Running Oak Capital and Castellan. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.45% for CTEF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.60 vs -0.29), 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.