SAPH vs. CLSE

Last updated Jul 30, 2026

SAPH (ADRhedged SAP ETF) and CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SAPH is a Actively Managed fund actively managed by ADRhedged, while CLSE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SAPH returned -32.30% vs 43.43% for CLSE. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. SAPH charges 0.19%/yr vs 1.52%/yr for CLSE.

Performance

SAPH vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ADRhedged SAP ETF (SAPH) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAPH achieves a -19.27% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 24.08% return.

SAPH

• 1D: 3.32%
• 1M: 19.22%
• 6M: -15.81%
• YTD: -19.27%
• 1Y: -32.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -20.71%

CLSE

• 1D: 1.47%
• 1M: -0.66%
• 6M: 18.98%
• YTD: 24.08%
• 1Y: 43.43%
• 3Y*: 29.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.39%

*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)
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	$14.78M	$11.66M	$9.77M
SAPH ADRhedged SAP ETF	$30.61K	$28.06K	$22.54K

SAPH vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SAPH ADRhedged SAP ETF	-19.27%	-13.65%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	24.08%	17.97%

Correlation

The correlation between SAPH and CLSE is -0.04, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2025	0.15

The correlation between SAPH and CLSE shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.15 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

SAPH vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAPH

SAPH Risk / Return Rank: 3
SAPH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
SAPH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
SAPH Omega Ratio Rank: 2
SAPH Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
SAPH Martin Ratio Rank: 4

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 97
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

SAPH vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ADRhedged SAP ETF (SAPH) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.

	SAPH	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.87	3.16	-4.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.15	4.32	-5.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.54	-0.69
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.69	9.00	-9.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.11	30.36	-31.47

SAPH vs. CLSE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAPH Sharpe Ratio is -0.87, which is lower than the CLSE Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAPH and CLSE, 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

SAPH vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAPH drawdown since its inception was -51.72%, which is greater than CLSE's maximum drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAPH and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAPH	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.72%	-16.45%	-35.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-47.17%	-4.85%	-42.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.47%	-1.57%	-37.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.11%	-3.52%	-19.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	29.05%	1.43%	+27.62%

Volatility

SAPH vs. CLSE - Volatility Comparison

ADRhedged SAP ETF (SAPH) has a higher volatility of 15.24% compared to Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) at 3.42%. This indicates that SAPH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SAPH	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.24%	3.42%	+11.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.67%	10.83%	+22.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.36%	13.79%	+23.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.48%	13.87%	+21.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.48%	13.87%	+21.61%

SAPH vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAPH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSE's 1.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAPH vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

SAPH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.46%, more than CLSE's 0.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.77%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%
SAPH ADRhedged SAP ETF	3.46%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAPH and CLSE in my portfolio?

SAPH and CLSE have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SAPH or CLSE?

SAPH has higher volatility (15.24%) compared to CLSE (3.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAPH dropped -51.72% vs CLSE's -16.45%.

Which ETF is better, SAPH or CLSE?

On 1-year performance, CLSE leads with 43.43% vs -32.30% for SAPH. On fees, SAPH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, CLSE has been the lower-risk option at 3.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SAPH or CLSE?

Over the 1-year period, CLSE has performed better with a 43.43% return vs -32.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAPH or CLSE?

SAPH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 1.52% for CLSE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SAPH or CLSE?

SAPH has the higher dividend yield at 3.46%, compared with 0.77% for CLSE.

What is the main difference between SAPH and CLSE?

SAPH is categorized as Actively Managed, while CLSE is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: ADRhedged and Convergence Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for SAPH and 1.52% for CLSE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs -0.87), 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.