TINS vs. CLSE

Last updated Jul 10, 2026

TINS (Templeton International Insights ETF) and CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TINS is a Actively Managed fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton Investments, while CLSE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners. Both are actively managed. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TINS charges 0.55%/yr vs 1.52%/yr for CLSE.

Performance

TINS vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Templeton International Insights ETF (TINS) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TINS achieves a 12.57% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 24.44% return.

TINS

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.76%
• 6M: 10.01%
• YTD: 12.57%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSE

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 1.40%
• 6M: 23.31%
• YTD: 24.44%
• 1Y: 46.56%
• 3Y*: 30.92%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TINS vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TINS Templeton International Insights ETF	12.57%	3.11%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	24.44%	7.12%

Correlation

The correlation between TINS and CLSE is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2025	0.60

Return for Risk

TINS vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

TINS

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 96
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

TINS vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Templeton International Insights ETF (TINS) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	TINS	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	3.40	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	4.57	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.59	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	9.65	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	33.96	—

Drawdowns

TINS vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TINS drawdown since its inception was -10.79%, smaller than the maximum CLSE drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TINS and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	TINS	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.79%	-16.45%	+5.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.85%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.55%	-1.28%	-1.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.16%	-3.55%	+1.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.38%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TINS	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.98%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.76%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.61%	13.75%	+3.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.61%	13.91%	+3.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.61%	13.91%	+3.70%

TINS vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

TINS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSE's 1.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

TINS vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

TINS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than CLSE's 0.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.76%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%
TINS Templeton International Insights ETF	0.21%	0.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TINS and CLSE in my portfolio?

TINS and CLSE have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, TINS or CLSE?

On fees, TINS is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TINS or CLSE?

TINS is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 1.52% for CLSE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TINS or CLSE?

CLSE has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.21% for TINS.

What is the main difference between TINS and CLSE?

TINS is categorized as Actively Managed, while CLSE is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton Investments and Convergence Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for TINS and 1.52% for CLSE.