TBFG vs. ONOF
TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and ONOF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. TBFG is actively managed, while ONOF is passively managed. Over the past year, TBFG returned 24.53% vs 23.60% for ONOF. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ONOF.
Performance
TBFG vs. ONOF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 10.35% return, which is significantly higher than ONOF's 7.32% return.
TBFG
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 4.39%
- YTD
- 10.35%
- 6M
- 11.14%
- 1Y
- 24.53%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ONOF
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 5.26%
- YTD
- 7.32%
- 6M
- 7.29%
- 1Y
- 23.60%
- 3Y*
- 13.72%
- 5Y*
- 9.34%
- 10Y*
- —
TBFG vs. ONOF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 10.35% | 14.56% | 10.48% |
ONOF Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF | 7.32% | 8.90% | 19.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBFG and ONOF is 0.88, 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 | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024 | 0.86 |
The correlation between TBFG and ONOF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
TBFG vs. ONOF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TBFG
ONOF
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
TBFG
ONOF
Financial Services
TBFG
ONOF
Industrials
TBFG
ONOF
Consumer Cyclical
TBFG
ONOF
Healthcare
TBFG
ONOF
Energy
TBFG
ONOF
Communication Services
TBFG
ONOF
Basic Materials
TBFG
ONOF
Consumer Defensive
TBFG
ONOF
Utilities
TBFG
ONOF
Real Estate
TBFG
ONOF
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
TBFG vs. ONOF — Risk / Return Rank
TBFG
ONOF
TBFG vs. ONOF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF (ONOF). 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.
| TBFG | ONOF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.38 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.23 | 3.45 | -0.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.95 | 11.88 | +2.07 |
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
| TBFG | ONOF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.53 | 2.11 | +0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.66 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.38 | 0.74 | +0.64 |
Drawdowns
TBFG vs. ONOF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, smaller than the maximum ONOF drawdown of -26.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and ONOF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBFG | ONOF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.43% | -26.21% | +12.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.63% | -6.86% | -0.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.67% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.21% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.36% | -0.68% | +0.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.63% | -6.15% | +4.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.76% | 1.99% | -0.23% |
Volatility
TBFG vs. ONOF - Volatility Comparison
The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF (ONOF) have volatilities of 3.00% and 3.03%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBFG | ONOF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.00% | 3.03% | -0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.00% | 7.95% | +0.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.73% | 11.25% | -1.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.95% | 14.30% | -3.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.95% | 14.33% | -3.38% |
TBFG vs. ONOF - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than ONOF's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBFG vs. ONOF - Dividend Comparison
TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, more than ONOF's 1.29% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ONOF Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF | 1.29% | 1.38% | 0.93% | 1.37% | 1.92% | 0.69% |
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 2.35% | 2.65% | 2.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TBFG and ONOF have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ONOF has higher volatility (3.03%) compared to TBFG (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFG dropped -13.43% vs ONOF's -26.21%.
On 1-year performance, TBFG leads with 24.53% vs 23.60% for ONOF. On fees, ONOF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TBFG has performed better with a 24.53% return vs 23.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ONOF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for TBFG.
TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 1.29% for ONOF.
They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 0.39% for ONOF.
TBFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.11), 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 TBFG and ONOF
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