RW vs. INFL

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

RW (Rainwater Equity ETF) and INFL (Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RW returned -0.24% vs 23.55% for INFL. Their 0.34 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. RW charges 1.25%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for INFL.

Performance

RW vs. INFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) and Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF (INFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RW achieves a 5.10% return, which is significantly lower than INFL's 16.12% return.

RW

• 1D: 2.35%
• 1M: 1.76%
• 6M: 4.51%
• YTD: 5.10%
• 1Y: -0.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.10%

INFL

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 3.27%
• 6M: 5.53%
• YTD: 16.12%
• 1Y: 23.55%
• 3Y*: 18.82%
• 5Y*: 13.01%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.37%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
INFL Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF	$5.25M	$5.01M	$13.11M
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	$56.07K	$44.16K	$46.35K

RW vs. INFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	5.10%	-0.44%
INFL Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF	16.12%	5.56%

Correlation

The correlation between RW and INFL is 0.34, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.34

RW vs. INFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RW	INFL
Industrials	48.9%	1.8%
Technology	23.5%	-
Financial Services	10.0%	20.6%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	-
Communication Services	3.9%	0.3%
Basic Materials	3.0%	19.1%
Healthcare	2.0%	1.3%
Consumer Defensive	0.2%	1.9%
Utilities	0.2%	3.0%
Real Estate	0.2%	1.2%
Energy	0.1%	43.4%

Return for Risk

RW vs. INFL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RW

RW Risk / Return Rank: 10
RW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
RW Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
RW Omega Ratio Rank: 10
RW Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
RW Martin Ratio Rank: 10

INFL

INFL Risk / Return Rank: 48
INFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
INFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
INFL Omega Ratio Rank: 50
INFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
INFL Martin Ratio Rank: 43

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RW vs. INFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) and Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF (INFL). 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.

	RW	INFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.02	1.46	-1.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.09	1.91	-1.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.25	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.01	1.94	-1.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.04	5.15	-5.19

RW vs. INFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RW Sharpe Ratio is -0.02, which is lower than the INFL Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RW and INFL, 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

RW vs. INFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RW drawdown since its inception was -17.04%, smaller than the maximum INFL drawdown of -21.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RW and INFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	RW	INFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.04%	-21.30%	+4.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.02%	-12.20%	-4.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.56%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.22%	-6.39%	+5.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.05%	-5.20%	+0.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.99%	4.58%	+1.41%

Volatility

RW vs. INFL - Volatility Comparison

Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) has a higher volatility of 4.64% compared to Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF (INFL) at 2.86%. This indicates that RW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RW	INFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.64%	2.86%	+1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.39%	11.98%	+1.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.95%	16.35%	-0.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.60%	17.74%	-2.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.60%	17.58%	-1.98%

RW vs. INFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RW has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than INFL's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

RW vs. INFL - Dividend Comparison

RW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.10%, less than INFL's 0.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
INFL Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF	0.80%	1.26%	1.77%	1.60%	1.65%	0.91%
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	0.10%	0.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RW and INFL in my portfolio?

RW and INFL have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RW or INFL?

RW has higher volatility (4.64%) compared to INFL (2.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RW dropped -17.04% vs INFL's -21.30%.

Which ETF is better, RW or INFL?

On 1-year performance, INFL leads with 23.55% vs -0.24% for RW. On fees, INFL is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, INFL has been the lower-risk option at 2.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RW or INFL?

Over the 1-year period, INFL has performed better with a 23.55% return vs -0.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RW or INFL?

INFL is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for RW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RW or INFL?

INFL has the higher dividend yield at 0.80%, compared with 0.10% for RW.

What is the main difference between RW and INFL?

They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Horizon Kinetics. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for RW and 0.85% for INFL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs -0.02), 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.