RYJ vs. RUNN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RYJ (Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF) and RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. RYJ is passively managed, while RUNN is actively managed. Over the past year, RYJ returned 17.80% vs -1.91% for RUNN. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RYJ charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RUNN.

Performance

RYJ vs. RUNN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF (RYJ) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RYJ achieves a 10.96% return, which is significantly higher than RUNN's -3.00% return.

RYJ

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 7.67%
• YTD: 10.96%
• 6M: 11.41%
• 1Y: 17.80%
• 3Y*: 15.43%
• 5Y*: 7.15%
• 10Y*: 10.35%

RUNN

• 1D: -0.89%
• 1M: -1.22%
• YTD: -3.00%
• 6M: -3.15%
• 1Y: -1.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RYJ vs. RUNN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RYJ Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF	10.96%	8.89%	13.28%	9.94%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	-3.00%	2.30%	17.16%	12.05%

Correlation

The correlation between RYJ and RUNN is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023	0.83

The correlation between RYJ and RUNN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

RYJ vs. RUNN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RYJ	RUNN
Consumer Defensive	23.3%	-
Industrials	20.7%	39.4%
Utilities	12.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	8.3%
Technology	9.8%	17.8%
Communication Services	7.7%	2.1%
Healthcare	5.8%	13.3%
Energy	4.1%	-
Basic Materials	4.0%	2.0%
Financial Services	-	12.8%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

RYJ vs. RUNN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RYJ

RYJ Risk / Return Rank: 37
RYJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
RYJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
RYJ Omega Ratio Rank: 34
RYJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
RYJ Martin Ratio Rank: 39

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 7
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 7
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

RYJ vs. RUNN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF (RYJ) and Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN). 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.

	RYJ	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.31	-0.15	+1.46
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	-0.13	+2.14
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	0.99	+0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.79	-0.19	+1.97
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.12	-0.44	+6.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RYJ vs. RUNN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RYJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.31, which is higher than the RUNN Sharpe Ratio of -0.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RYJ and RUNN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RYJ	RUNN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.31	-0.15	+1.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.68	-0.33

Drawdowns

RYJ vs. RUNN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RYJ drawdown since its inception was -60.74%, which is greater than RUNN's maximum drawdown of -16.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYJ and RUNN.

Drawdown Indicators

	RYJ	RUNN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.74%	-16.83%	-43.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-10.34%	+0.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.90%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-50.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	-7.89%	+7.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.27%	-3.54%	-6.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.92%	4.34%	-1.42%

Volatility

RYJ vs. RUNN - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF (RYJ) has a higher volatility of 4.27% compared to Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) at 3.57%. This indicates that RYJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RUNN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RYJ	RUNN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.27%	3.57%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.96%	9.70%	+0.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.62%	12.85%	+0.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.65%	13.81%	+4.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.64%	13.81%	+7.83%

RYJ vs. RUNN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RYJ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than RUNN's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

RYJ vs. RUNN - Dividend Comparison

RYJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, more than RUNN's 0.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.57%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RYJ Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF	1.57%	1.75%	1.28%	1.39%	0.72%	0.52%	0.28%	0.20%	1.43%	0.00%	1.55%	0.93%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RYJ and RUNN in my portfolio?

RYJ and RUNN have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RYJ or RUNN?

RYJ has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to RUNN (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RYJ dropped -60.74% vs RUNN's -16.83%.

Which ETF is better, RYJ or RUNN?

On 1-year performance, RYJ leads with 17.80% vs -1.91% for RUNN. On fees, RYJ is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RYJ or RUNN?

Over the 1-year period, RYJ has performed better with a 17.80% return vs -1.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RYJ or RUNN?

RYJ is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.

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

RYJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 0.57% for RUNN.

What is the main difference between RYJ and RUNN?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Running Oak Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RYJ and 0.58% for RUNN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RYJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs -0.15), 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.