SFGV vs. CAOS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SFGV (Sequoia Global Value ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SFGV is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Sequoia Financial, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SFGV returned 26.03% vs 1.73% for CAOS. Their -0.21 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. SFGV charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

SFGV vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SFGV achieves a 13.93% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.76% return.

SFGV

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 1.16%
• 6M: 7.57%
• YTD: 13.93%
• 1Y: 26.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.47%

CAOS

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -0.01%
• 6M: 0.16%
• YTD: 0.76%
• 1Y: 1.73%
• 3Y*: 3.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.70%

*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)
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	$6.81M	$5.39M	$5.09M
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	$327.92K	$400.72K	$470.11K

SFGV vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	13.93%	18.84%	11.04%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.76%	2.55%	5.66%

Correlation

The correlation between SFGV and CAOS is -0.32, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 18, 2024	-0.21

The correlation between SFGV and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.32 (1 year) to -0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

SFGV vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

SFGV

SFGV Risk / Return Rank: 87
SFGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
SFGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
SFGV Omega Ratio Rank: 89
SFGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
SFGV Martin Ratio Rank: 84

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 56
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

SFGV vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	SFGV	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	1.19	+1.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	1.89	+1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.24	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.04	2.47	+0.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.70	5.45	+6.25

SFGV vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SFGV Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SFGV and CAOS, 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

SFGV vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SFGV drawdown since its inception was -14.51%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SFGV and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	SFGV	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.51%	-3.89%	-10.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.36%	-0.76%	-7.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.89%	-1.13%	+0.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.81%	-0.92%	-0.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.17%	0.34%	+1.83%

Volatility

SFGV vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) has a higher volatility of 2.75% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. This indicates that SFGV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SFGV	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.75%	0.51%	+2.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.72%	1.07%	+7.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.54%	1.57%	+9.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.08%	4.18%	+8.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.08%	4.18%	+8.90%

SFGV vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SFGV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

SFGV vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

SFGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	2.34%	2.52%	2.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SFGV and CAOS in my portfolio?

SFGV and CAOS have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SFGV or CAOS?

SFGV has higher volatility (2.75%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SFGV dropped -14.51% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, SFGV or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, SFGV leads with 26.03% vs 1.73% for CAOS. On fees, SFGV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SFGV or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, SFGV has performed better with a 26.03% return vs 1.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SFGV or CAOS?

SFGV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SFGV or CAOS?

SFGV has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between SFGV and CAOS?

SFGV is categorized as Global Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Sequoia Financial and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for SFGV and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SFGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 1.19), 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.