TBFG vs. RHRX
TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and RHRX (RH Tactical Rotation ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TBFG returned 24.15% vs 40.56% for RHRX. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 1.36%/yr for RHRX.
Performance
TBFG vs. RHRX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 10.44% return, which is significantly lower than RHRX's 21.23% return.
TBFG
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 3.51%
- YTD
- 10.44%
- 6M
- 11.28%
- 1Y
- 24.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RHRX
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 5.51%
- YTD
- 21.23%
- 6M
- 21.28%
- 1Y
- 40.56%
- 3Y*
- 22.82%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TBFG vs. RHRX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 10.44% | 14.56% | 10.48% |
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 21.23% | 16.70% | 22.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBFG and RHRX is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024 | 0.84 |
The correlation between TBFG and RHRX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
TBFG vs. RHRX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TBFG
RHRX
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
TBFG
RHRX
Financial Services
TBFG
RHRX
Industrials
TBFG
RHRX
Consumer Cyclical
TBFG
RHRX
Healthcare
TBFG
RHRX
Energy
TBFG
RHRX
Communication Services
TBFG
RHRX
Basic Materials
TBFG
RHRX
Consumer Defensive
TBFG
RHRX
Utilities
TBFG
RHRX
Real Estate
TBFG
RHRX
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. RHRX — Risk / Return Rank
TBFG
RHRX
TBFG vs. RHRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX). 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 | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.54 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | 5.97 | -2.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.74 | 23.40 | -9.66 |
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 | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.49 | 3.09 | -0.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.39 | 0.53 | +0.86 |
Drawdowns
TBFG vs. RHRX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, smaller than the maximum RHRX drawdown of -25.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and RHRX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBFG | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.43% | -25.33% | +11.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.63% | -6.83% | -0.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.28% | -0.40% | +0.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.62% | -8.95% | +7.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.76% | 1.74% | +0.02% |
Volatility
TBFG vs. RHRX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) is 2.91%, while RH Tactical Rotation ETF (RHRX) has a volatility of 4.24%. This indicates that TBFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RHRX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBFG | RHRX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.91% | 4.24% | -1.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.00% | 9.72% | -1.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.73% | 13.18% | -3.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.94% | 19.03% | -8.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.94% | 19.03% | -8.09% |
TBFG vs. RHRX - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than RHRX's 1.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBFG vs. RHRX - Dividend Comparison
TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, while RHRX has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
RHRX RH Tactical Rotation ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 2.35% | 2.65% | 2.43% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TBFG and RHRX have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RHRX has higher volatility (4.24%) compared to TBFG (2.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFG dropped -13.43% vs RHRX's -25.33%.
On 1-year performance, RHRX leads with 40.56% vs 24.15% for TBFG. On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, TBFG has been the lower-risk option at 2.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RHRX has performed better with a 40.56% return vs 24.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 1.36% for RHRX.
TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 0.00% for RHRX.
They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and Adaptive. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 1.36% for RHRX.
RHRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.09 vs 2.49), 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 RHRX
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