TBFC vs. TACK
TBFC (The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF) and TACK (Fairlead Tactical Sector Fund) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TBFC returned 15.23% vs 14.32% for TACK. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFC charges 0.44%/yr vs 0.76%/yr for TACK.
Performance
TBFC vs. TACK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with TBFC having a 5.77% return and TACK slightly lower at 5.73%.
TBFC
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- YTD
- 5.77%
- 6M
- 6.35%
- 1Y
- 15.23%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TACK
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- 2.01%
- YTD
- 5.73%
- 6M
- 6.10%
- 1Y
- 14.32%
- 3Y*
- 11.30%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TBFC vs. TACK - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TBFC The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF | 5.77% | 11.38% | 8.18% |
TACK Fairlead Tactical Sector Fund | 5.73% | 10.93% | 13.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBFC and TACK is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024 | 0.85 |
The correlation between TBFC and TACK has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
TBFC vs. TACK - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TBFC
TACK
Technology
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Technology
TBFC
TACK
Financial Services
TBFC
TACK
-
Industrials
TBFC
TACK
Healthcare
TBFC
TACK
Consumer Cyclical
TBFC
TACK
Energy
TBFC
TACK
Consumer Defensive
TBFC
TACK
Communication Services
TBFC
TACK
Basic Materials
TBFC
TACK
Utilities
TBFC
TACK
Real Estate
TBFC
TACK
-
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
TBFC vs. TACK — Risk / Return Rank
TBFC
TACK
TBFC vs. TACK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) and Fairlead Tactical Sector Fund (TACK). 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.
| TBFC | TACK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.26 | +0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.81 | 2.46 | +0.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.86 | 7.73 | +4.13 |
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
| TBFC | TACK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.41 | 1.52 | +0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.51 | 0.63 | +0.88 |
Drawdowns
TBFC vs. TACK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBFC drawdown since its inception was -8.89%, smaller than the maximum TACK drawdown of -14.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFC and TACK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBFC | TACK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.89% | -14.49% | +5.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.45% | -5.85% | +0.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.49% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.23% | -0.39% | +0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.06% | -4.23% | +3.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.29% | 1.86% | -0.57% |
Volatility
TBFC vs. TACK - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) is 2.06%, while Fairlead Tactical Sector Fund (TACK) has a volatility of 2.45%. This indicates that TBFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TACK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBFC | TACK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.06% | 2.45% | -0.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.24% | 7.10% | -1.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.35% | 9.49% | -3.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.14% | 11.24% | -4.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.14% | 11.24% | -4.10% |
TBFC vs. TACK - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBFC has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is lower than TACK's 0.76% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBFC vs. TACK - Dividend Comparison
TBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, more than TACK's 1.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TACK Fairlead Tactical Sector Fund | 1.20% | 1.18% | 1.26% | 1.29% | 0.89% |
TBFC The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF | 2.93% | 3.28% | 2.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TBFC and TACK have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TACK has higher volatility (2.45%) compared to TBFC (2.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFC dropped -8.89% vs TACK's -14.49%.
On 1-year performance, TBFC leads with 15.23% vs 14.32% for TACK. On fees, TBFC is cheaper at 0.44% per year. On volatility, TBFC has been the lower-risk option at 2.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TBFC has performed better with a 15.23% return vs 14.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TBFC is cheaper with a 0.44% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for TACK.
TBFC has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 1.20% for TACK.
They also come from different issuers: Brinsmere and Fairlead. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for TBFC and 0.76% for TACK.
TBFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.52), 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 TBFC and TACK
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