SRHR vs. NETL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SRHR (SRH REIT Covered Call ETF) and NETL (NETLease Corporate Real Estate ETF) are both REIT funds. SRHR is actively managed, while NETL is passively managed. Over the past year, SRHR returned 11.67% vs 11.59% for NETL. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SRHR charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for NETL.

Performance

SRHR vs. NETL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SRH REIT Covered Call ETF (SRHR) and NETLease Corporate Real Estate ETF (NETL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with SRHR having a 10.28% return and NETL slightly higher at 10.34%.

SRHR

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 2.83%
• YTD: 10.28%
• 6M: 9.84%
• 1Y: 11.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NETL

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -1.07%
• YTD: 10.34%
• 6M: 9.20%
• 1Y: 11.59%
• 3Y*: 7.12%
• 5Y*: 1.33%
• 10Y*: —

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

SRHR vs. NETL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SRHR SRH REIT Covered Call ETF	10.28%	-0.91%	3.94%	15.82%
NETL NETLease Corporate Real Estate ETF	10.34%	6.05%	-1.08%	14.78%

Correlation

The correlation between SRHR and NETL is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2023	0.83

The correlation between SRHR and NETL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

SRHR vs. NETL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SRHR	NETL
Real Estate	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SRHR vs. NETL — Risk / Return Rank

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

SRHR

SRHR Risk / Return Rank: 26
SRHR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
SRHR Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
SRHR Omega Ratio Rank: 24
SRHR Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
SRHR Martin Ratio Rank: 28

NETL

NETL Risk / Return Rank: 25
NETL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
NETL Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
NETL Omega Ratio Rank: 22
NETL Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
NETL Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

SRHR vs. NETL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SRH REIT Covered Call ETF (SRHR) and NETLease Corporate Real Estate ETF (NETL). 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.

	SRHR	NETL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.91	0.86	+0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.34	1.26	+0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.15	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.41	1.27	+0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.14	3.99	+0.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SRHR vs. NETL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SRHR Sharpe Ratio is 0.91, which is comparable to the NETL Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SRHR and NETL, 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

	SRHR	NETL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91	0.86	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.07	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.71	0.20	+0.52

Drawdowns

SRHR vs. NETL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SRHR drawdown since its inception was -18.68%, smaller than the maximum NETL drawdown of -51.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SRHR and NETL.

Drawdown Indicators

	SRHR	NETL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.68%	-51.48%	+32.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.34%	-9.16%	+0.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.30%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-30.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.39%	-3.68%	+1.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.92%	-11.65%	+6.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.82%	2.91%	-0.09%

Volatility

SRHR vs. NETL - Volatility Comparison

SRH REIT Covered Call ETF (SRHR) has a higher volatility of 4.07% compared to NETLease Corporate Real Estate ETF (NETL) at 3.66%. This indicates that SRHR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NETL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SRHR	NETL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.07%	3.66%	+0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.52%	9.66%	-0.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.86%	13.57%	-0.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.83%	17.94%	-2.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.83%	25.92%	-10.09%

SRHR vs. NETL - Expense Ratio Comparison

SRHR has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than NETL's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

SRHR vs. NETL - Dividend Comparison

SRHR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.43%, more than NETL's 4.83% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
NETL NETLease Corporate Real Estate ETF	4.83%	5.12%	5.08%	4.57%	4.47%	4.03%	3.98%	2.52%
SRHR SRH REIT Covered Call ETF	6.43%	7.07%	6.90%	0.95%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SRHR and NETL in my portfolio?

SRHR and NETL have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SRHR or NETL?

SRHR has higher volatility (4.07%) compared to NETL (3.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SRHR dropped -18.68% vs NETL's -51.48%.

Which ETF is better, SRHR or NETL?

On 1-year performance, SRHR leads with 11.67% vs 11.59% for NETL. On fees, NETL is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, NETL has been the lower-risk option at 3.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SRHR or NETL?

Over the 1-year period, SRHR has performed better with a 11.67% return vs 11.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SRHR or NETL?

NETL is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for SRHR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SRHR or NETL?

SRHR has the higher dividend yield at 6.43%, compared with 4.83% for NETL.

What is the main difference between SRHR and NETL?

They also come from different issuers: SRH and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for SRHR and 0.60% for NETL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SRHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.91 vs 0.86), 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.