SCSB vs. RMRC
SCSB (Sterling Capital Short Duration Bond ETF) and RMRC (ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF) are both Actively Managed funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SCSB charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for RMRC.
Performance
SCSB vs. RMRC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
SCSB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RMRC
- 1D
- 0.74%
- 1M
- 1.03%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCSB vs. RMRC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
SCSB Sterling Capital Short Duration Bond ETF | 1.22% |
RMRC ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF | 9.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between SCSB and RMRC is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 30, 2026 | 0.26 |
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
SCSB vs. RMRC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sterling Capital Short Duration Bond ETF (SCSB) and ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF (RMRC). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SCSB vs. RMRC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SCSB drawdown since its inception was -0.46%, smaller than the maximum RMRC drawdown of -6.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCSB and RMRC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SCSB | RMRC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.46% | -6.57% | +6.11% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.09% | -1.63% | +1.54% |
Volatility
SCSB vs. RMRC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SCSB | RMRC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.47% | 10.22% | -8.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.47% | 10.22% | -8.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.47% | 10.22% | -8.75% |
SCSB vs. RMRC - Expense Ratio Comparison
SCSB has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than RMRC's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
SCSB vs. RMRC - Dividend Comparison
SCSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, more than RMRC's 0.58% yield.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
RMRC ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF | 0.58% |
SCSB Sterling Capital Short Duration Bond ETF | 1.62% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SCSB and RMRC have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SCSB is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SCSB is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for RMRC.
SCSB has the higher dividend yield at 1.62%, compared with 0.58% for RMRC.
They also come from different issuers: Sterling Capital and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for SCSB and 0.60% for RMRC.
Find the right allocation for SCSB and RMRC
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