TDSC vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

TDSC (Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. TDSC is actively managed, while CLSM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TDSC returned 11.06%/yr vs 13.89%/yr for CLSM. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TDSC charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

TDSC vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF (TDSC) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TDSC achieves a 11.58% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 20.91% return.

TDSC

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 3.52%
• YTD: 11.58%
• 6M: 11.52%
• 1Y: 20.40%
• 3Y*: 11.06%
• 5Y*: 3.44%
• 10Y*: —

CLSM

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 9.14%
• YTD: 20.91%
• 6M: 20.97%
• 1Y: 35.30%
• 3Y*: 13.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TDSC vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TDSC Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF	11.58%	6.56%	7.10%	7.63%	-19.67%	4.58%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	20.91%	15.32%	1.87%	3.78%	-23.23%	9.10%

Correlation

The correlation between TDSC and CLSM 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2021	0.88

The correlation between TDSC and CLSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

TDSC vs. CLSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TDSC	CLSM
Technology	28.5%	51.8%
Healthcare	19.9%	1.4%
Energy	17.6%	0.2%
Utilities	15.0%	0.5%
Communication Services	4.7%	5.5%
Consumer Cyclical	4.3%	4.4%
Financial Services	3.9%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	34.8%
Industrials	2.0%	1.0%
Basic Materials	0.7%	0.4%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.0%

Return for Risk

TDSC vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

TDSC

TDSC Risk / Return Rank: 71
TDSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
TDSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
TDSC Omega Ratio Rank: 67
TDSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
TDSC Martin Ratio Rank: 76

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 82
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
CLSM Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

TDSC vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF (TDSC) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). 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.

	TDSC	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	2.79	-0.49
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.24	3.68	-0.44
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.51	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.85	4.25	-0.40
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.00	17.62	-2.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TDSC vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TDSC Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TDSC and CLSM, 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

	TDSC	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.30	2.79	-0.49
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.35	+0.05

Drawdowns

TDSC vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TDSC drawdown since its inception was -21.51%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -27.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TDSC and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TDSC	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.51%	-27.77%	+6.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.35%	-8.50%	+3.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.24%	-14.60%	+0.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.39%	-16.50%	+7.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.37%	2.05%	-0.68%

Volatility

TDSC vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF (TDSC) is 2.12%, while Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) has a volatility of 3.60%. This indicates that TDSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TDSC	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.12%	3.60%	-1.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.64%	10.58%	-3.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.89%	12.70%	-3.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.28%	12.47%	-2.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.23%	12.47%	-2.24%

TDSC vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

TDSC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

TDSC vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

TDSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, more than CLSM's 0.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.74%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%	0.00%
TDSC Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF	2.00%	2.92%	2.06%	2.06%	1.76%	1.11%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TDSC and CLSM in my portfolio?

TDSC and CLSM 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.

Which is riskier, TDSC or CLSM?

CLSM has higher volatility (3.60%) compared to TDSC (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TDSC dropped -21.51% vs CLSM's -27.77%.

Which ETF is better, TDSC or CLSM?

On 3-year performance, CLSM leads with 13.89% vs 11.06% for TDSC. On fees, TDSC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, TDSC has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TDSC or CLSM?

Over the 3-year period, CLSM has performed better with a 13.89% return vs 11.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TDSC or CLSM?

TDSC is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.82% for CLSM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TDSC or CLSM?

TDSC has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 0.74% for CLSM.

What is the main difference between TDSC and CLSM?

They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for TDSC and 0.82% for CLSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 2.30), 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.