TBFC vs. TDSB
TBFC (The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF) and TDSB (Cabana Target Drawdown 7 ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TBFC returned 15.23% vs 14.94% for TDSB. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TBFC charges 0.44%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for TDSB.
Performance
TBFC vs. TDSB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TBFC achieves a 5.77% return, which is significantly higher than TDSB's 4.87% return.
TBFC
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- YTD
- 5.77%
- 6M
- 6.35%
- 1Y
- 15.23%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TDSB
- 1D
- 0.32%
- 1M
- 0.57%
- YTD
- 4.87%
- 6M
- 5.00%
- 1Y
- 14.94%
- 3Y*
- 8.91%
- 5Y*
- 2.22%
- 10Y*
- —
TBFC vs. TDSB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TBFC The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF | 5.77% | 11.38% | 8.18% |
TDSB Cabana Target Drawdown 7 ETF | 4.87% | 12.95% | 4.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBFC and TDSB is 0.73, 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 | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024 | 0.70 |
The correlation between TBFC and TDSB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
TBFC vs. TDSB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TBFC
TDSB
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
TBFC
TDSB
Financial Services
TBFC
TDSB
Industrials
TBFC
TDSB
Healthcare
TBFC
TDSB
Consumer Cyclical
TBFC
TDSB
Energy
TBFC
TDSB
Consumer Defensive
TBFC
TDSB
Communication Services
TBFC
TDSB
Basic Materials
TBFC
TDSB
Utilities
TBFC
TDSB
Real Estate
TBFC
TDSB
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. TDSB — Risk / Return Rank
TBFC
TDSB
TBFC vs. TDSB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) and Cabana Target Drawdown 7 ETF (TDSB). 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 | TDSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.48 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.81 | 3.23 | -0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.86 | 12.83 | -0.97 |
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 | TDSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.41 | 2.51 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.30 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.51 | 0.32 | +1.19 |
Drawdowns
TBFC vs. TDSB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBFC drawdown since its inception was -8.89%, smaller than the maximum TDSB drawdown of -19.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFC and TDSB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBFC | TDSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.89% | -19.56% | +10.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.45% | -4.64% | -0.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -6.84% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.23% | -0.59% | +0.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.06% | -9.12% | +8.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.29% | 1.17% | +0.12% |
Volatility
TBFC vs. TDSB - Volatility Comparison
The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) has a higher volatility of 2.06% compared to Cabana Target Drawdown 7 ETF (TDSB) at 1.63%. This indicates that TBFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TDSB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBFC | TDSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.06% | 1.63% | +0.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.24% | 5.02% | +0.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.35% | 5.98% | +0.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.14% | 7.32% | -0.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.14% | 7.53% | -0.39% |
TBFC vs. TDSB - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBFC has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is lower than TDSB's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBFC vs. TDSB - Dividend Comparison
TBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, more than TDSB's 2.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TBFC The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF | 2.93% | 3.28% | 2.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TDSB Cabana Target Drawdown 7 ETF | 2.12% | 1.93% | 3.50% | 2.77% | 1.81% | 1.75% | 0.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TBFC and TDSB have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TBFC has higher volatility (2.06%) compared to TDSB (1.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFC dropped -8.89% vs TDSB's -19.56%.
On 1-year performance, TBFC leads with 15.23% vs 14.94% for TDSB. On fees, TBFC is cheaper at 0.44% per year. On volatility, TDSB has been the lower-risk option at 1.63%. 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 14.94%. 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 0.69% for TDSB.
TBFC has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 2.12% for TDSB.
They also come from different issuers: Brinsmere and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for TBFC and 0.69% for TDSB.
TDSB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 2.41), 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 TDSB
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