SMIZ vs. RUNN
SMIZ (Zacks Small/Mid Cap ETF) and RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SMIZ returned 30.97% vs -1.91% for RUNN. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SMIZ charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RUNN.
Performance
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMIZ achieves a 15.79% return, which is significantly higher than RUNN's -3.00% return.
SMIZ
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 3.15%
- YTD
- 15.79%
- 6M
- 14.09%
- 1Y
- 30.97%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RUNN
- 1D
- -0.89%
- 1M
- -1.22%
- YTD
- -3.00%
- 6M
- -3.15%
- 1Y
- -1.91%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SMIZ Zacks Small/Mid Cap ETF | 15.79% | 12.16% | 17.92% | 16.39% |
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | -3.00% | 2.30% | 17.16% | 12.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMIZ and RUNN is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2023 | 0.79 |
The correlation between SMIZ and RUNN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SMIZ
RUNN
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Communication Services
Technology
SMIZ
RUNN
Industrials
SMIZ
RUNN
Financial Services
SMIZ
RUNN
Healthcare
SMIZ
RUNN
Consumer Cyclical
SMIZ
RUNN
Consumer Defensive
SMIZ
RUNN
-
Real Estate
SMIZ
RUNN
-
Basic Materials
SMIZ
RUNN
Energy
SMIZ
RUNN
-
Utilities
SMIZ
RUNN
-
Communication Services
SMIZ
RUNN
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
SMIZ vs. RUNN — Risk / Return Rank
SMIZ
RUNN
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Zacks Small/Mid Cap ETF (SMIZ) 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.
| SMIZ | RUNN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 0.99 | +0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.96 | -0.19 | +3.15 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.82 | -0.44 | +12.26 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SMIZ | RUNN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.86 | -0.15 | +2.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.29 | 0.68 | +0.62 |
Drawdowns
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMIZ drawdown since its inception was -25.04%, which is greater than RUNN's maximum drawdown of -16.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMIZ and RUNN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMIZ | RUNN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.04% | -16.83% | -8.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.51% | -10.34% | -0.17% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.83% | -7.89% | +7.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.97% | -3.54% | -0.43% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.63% | 4.34% | -1.71% |
Volatility
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Volatility Comparison
Zacks Small/Mid Cap ETF (SMIZ) has a higher volatility of 4.59% compared to Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) at 3.57%. This indicates that SMIZ'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMIZ | RUNN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.59% | 3.57% | +1.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.79% | 9.70% | +3.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.76% | 12.85% | +3.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.89% | 13.81% | +5.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.89% | 13.81% | +5.08% |
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMIZ has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than RUNN's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMIZ vs. RUNN - Dividend Comparison
SMIZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than RUNN's 0.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | 0.57% | 0.55% | 0.39% | 0.33% |
SMIZ Zacks Small/Mid Cap ETF | 0.53% | 0.62% | 1.57% | 0.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMIZ and RUNN have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMIZ has higher volatility (4.59%) compared to RUNN (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMIZ dropped -25.04% vs RUNN's -16.83%.
On 1-year performance, SMIZ leads with 30.97% vs -1.91% for RUNN. On fees, SMIZ is cheaper at 0.56% 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.
Over the 1-year period, SMIZ has performed better with a 30.97% return vs -1.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMIZ is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.
RUNN has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.53% for SMIZ.
They also come from different issuers: Zacks and Running Oak Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for SMIZ and 0.58% for RUNN.
SMIZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 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.
Find the right allocation for SMIZ and RUNN
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