TBFG vs. XRLX

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and XRLX (FundX Conservative ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TBFG returned 25.22% vs 18.58% for XRLX. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 1.63%/yr for XRLX.

Performance

TBFG vs. XRLX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 10.75% return, which is significantly higher than XRLX's 8.36% return.

TBFG

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 4.16%
• YTD: 10.75%
• 6M: 11.92%
• 1Y: 25.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XRLX

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 4.48%
• YTD: 8.36%
• 6M: 8.80%
• 1Y: 18.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TBFG vs. XRLX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	10.75%	14.56%	10.48%
XRLX FundX Conservative ETF	8.36%	7.85%	17.32%

Correlation

The correlation between TBFG and XRLX is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024	0.90

The correlation between TBFG and XRLX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

TBFG vs. XRLX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TBFG	XRLX
Technology	21.5%	36.8%
Financial Services	17.7%	12.1%
Industrials	13.3%	7.1%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	10.0%
Healthcare	8.3%	6.6%
Energy	7.0%	3.3%
Communication Services	6.0%	11.9%
Basic Materials	6.0%	2.7%
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	4.9%
Utilities	3.4%	3.2%
Real Estate	2.4%	1.4%

Return for Risk

TBFG vs. XRLX — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBFG

TBFG Risk / Return Rank: 76
TBFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
TBFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
TBFG Omega Ratio Rank: 80
TBFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
TBFG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

XRLX

XRLX Risk / Return Rank: 68
XRLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
XRLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
XRLX Omega Ratio Rank: 70
XRLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
XRLX Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

TBFG vs. XRLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX). 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	XRLX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.31	+0.30
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	3.31	+0.33
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.43	+0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.37	3.02	+0.35
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.61	13.65	+0.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TBFG vs. XRLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBFG Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the XRLX Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBFG and XRLX, 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

	TBFG	XRLX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.61	2.31	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.40	1.44	-0.03

Drawdowns

TBFG vs. XRLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, smaller than the maximum XRLX drawdown of -15.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and XRLX.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBFG	XRLX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-15.33%	+1.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.63%	-6.28%	-1.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-1.70%	+0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	1.39%	+0.37%

Volatility

TBFG vs. XRLX - Volatility Comparison

The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) has a higher volatility of 3.05% compared to FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) at 2.59%. This indicates that TBFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XRLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TBFG	XRLX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.05%	2.59%	+0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.00%	6.64%	+1.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.73%	8.08%	+1.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.96%	11.05%	-0.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.96%	11.05%	-0.09%

TBFG vs. XRLX - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than XRLX's 1.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBFG vs. XRLX - Dividend Comparison

TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, less than XRLX's 2.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	2.34%	2.65%	2.43%	0.00%
XRLX FundX Conservative ETF	2.56%	2.77%	1.66%	1.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBFG and XRLX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, TBFG and XRLX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, TBFG or XRLX?

TBFG has higher volatility (3.05%) compared to XRLX (2.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFG dropped -13.43% vs XRLX's -15.33%.

Which ETF is better, TBFG or XRLX?

On 1-year performance, TBFG leads with 25.22% vs 18.58% for XRLX. On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, XRLX has been the lower-risk option at 2.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBFG or XRLX?

Over the 1-year period, TBFG has performed better with a 25.22% return vs 18.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBFG or XRLX?

TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 1.63% for XRLX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TBFG or XRLX?

XRLX has the higher dividend yield at 2.56%, compared with 2.34% for TBFG.

What is the main difference between TBFG and XRLX?

They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and FundX. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 1.63% for XRLX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TBFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.31), 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.