TILL vs. CANE
TILL (Teucrium Agricultural Strategy No K-1 ETF) and CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - TILL is a Commodities fund actively managed by Teucrium, while CANE is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark. TILL is actively managed, while CANE is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TILL returned -5.74%/yr vs -10.12%/yr for CANE. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TILL charges 0.89%/yr vs 1.88%/yr for CANE.
Performance
TILL vs. CANE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TILL achieves a 5.10% return, which is significantly higher than CANE's -0.56% return.
TILL
- 1D
- -1.13%
- 1M
- -6.31%
- YTD
- 5.10%
- 6M
- 3.12%
- 1Y
- -1.33%
- 3Y*
- -5.74%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CANE
- 1D
- 0.21%
- 1M
- -5.64%
- YTD
- -0.56%
- 6M
- 0.99%
- 1Y
- -13.44%
- 3Y*
- -10.12%
- 5Y*
- 2.95%
- 10Y*
- -2.24%
TILL vs. CANE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TILL Teucrium Agricultural Strategy No K-1 ETF | 5.10% | -5.97% | -13.98% | -5.00% | -12.66% |
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | -0.56% | -14.65% | -7.79% | 30.06% | -4.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between TILL and CANE is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2022 | 0.53 |
The correlation between TILL and CANE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
TILL vs. CANE — Risk / Return Rank
TILL
CANE
TILL vs. CANE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Agricultural Strategy No K-1 ETF (TILL) and Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE). 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.
| TILL | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.78 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 0.91 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.15 | -0.68 | +0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.25 | -1.11 | +0.86 |
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
| TILL | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.11 | -0.65 | +0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.10 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.56 | -0.26 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
TILL vs. CANE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TILL drawdown since its inception was -33.76%, smaller than the maximum CANE drawdown of -81.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TILL and CANE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TILL | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.76% | -81.30% | +47.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.98% | -19.89% | +10.91% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.40% | -41.73% | +11.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -41.73% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -67.29% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -29.47% | -63.13% | +33.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.40% | -56.50% | +35.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.41% | 12.16% | -6.75% |
Volatility
TILL vs. CANE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Teucrium Agricultural Strategy No K-1 ETF (TILL) is 5.38%, while Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a volatility of 6.84%. This indicates that TILL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CANE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TILL | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.38% | 6.84% | -1.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.25% | 15.77% | -5.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.68% | 20.68% | -8.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.74% | 21.06% | -6.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.74% | 21.72% | -6.98% |
TILL vs. CANE - Expense Ratio Comparison
TILL has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than CANE's 1.88% expense ratio.
Dividends
TILL vs. CANE - Dividend Comparison
TILL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.72%, while CANE has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TILL Teucrium Agricultural Strategy No K-1 ETF | 4.72% | 4.97% | 2.55% | 51.24% | 0.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TILL and CANE have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CANE has higher volatility (6.84%) compared to TILL (5.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TILL dropped -33.76% vs CANE's -81.30%.
On 3-year performance, TILL leads with -5.74% vs -10.12% for CANE. On fees, TILL is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, TILL has been the lower-risk option at 5.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, TILL has performed better with a -5.74% return vs -10.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TILL is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.
TILL has the higher dividend yield at 4.72%, compared with 0.00% for CANE.
TILL is categorized as Commodities, while CANE is Agricultural Commodities. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for TILL and 1.88% for CANE.
TILL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.11 vs -0.65), 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 TILL and CANE
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