PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TUG vs. INCM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TUG vs. INCM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TUG achieves a 20.36% return, which is significantly higher than INCM's 6.45% return.


TUG

1D
-0.48%
1M
11.01%
YTD
20.36%
6M
19.04%
1Y
40.10%
3Y*
23.61%
5Y*
10Y*

INCM

1D
-0.48%
1M
0.70%
YTD
6.45%
6M
6.84%
1Y
15.73%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TUG vs. INCM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
TUG
STF Tactical Growth ETF
20.36%20.43%19.37%9.44%
INCM
Franklin Income Focus ETF
6.45%13.07%6.80%5.76%

Correlation

The correlation between TUG and INCM is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023

0.47

TUG vs. INCM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
TUG
INCM

Technology

54.6%
2.4%

Communication Services

15.4%
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

12.0%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
6.7%

Healthcare

4.1%
2.6%

Industrials

3.0%
1.9%

Utilities

1.4%
4.9%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.9%

Energy

0.7%
3.8%

Financial Services

0.3%
8.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.0%

Technology

TUG
54.6%
INCM
2.4%

Communication Services

TUG
15.4%
INCM
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

TUG
12.0%
INCM
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

TUG
7.4%
INCM
6.7%

Healthcare

TUG
4.1%
INCM
2.6%

Industrials

TUG
3.0%
INCM
1.9%

Utilities

TUG
1.4%
INCM
4.9%

Basic Materials

TUG
1.1%
INCM
1.9%

Energy

TUG
0.7%
INCM
3.8%

Financial Services

TUG
0.3%
INCM
8.2%

Real Estate

TUG
0.1%
INCM
0.0%

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

TUG vs. INCM — Risk / Return Rank

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

TUG
TUG Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
TUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
TUG Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
TUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
TUG Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

INCM
INCM Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
INCM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INCM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
INCM Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
INCM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
INCM Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

TUG vs. INCM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). 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.


TUGINCMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.57

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.27

4.95

-1.68

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.47

20.86

-8.39

TUG vs. INCM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TUG Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the INCM Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TUG and INCM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TUGINCMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.49

3.01

-0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.12

1.51

-0.39

Drawdowns

TUG vs. INCM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TUG drawdown since its inception was -22.27%, which is greater than INCM's maximum drawdown of -7.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TUG and INCM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TUGINCMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.27%

-7.84%

-14.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.31%

-3.19%

-9.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.48%

-0.75%

+0.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.31%

-1.09%

-3.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.22%

0.76%

+2.46%

Volatility

TUG vs. INCM - Volatility Comparison

STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) has a higher volatility of 4.30% compared to Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) at 1.66%. This indicates that TUG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INCM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TUGINCMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.30%

1.66%

+2.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.23%

3.82%

+8.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.16%

5.25%

+10.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.02%

7.23%

+10.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.02%

7.23%

+10.79%

TUG vs. INCM - Expense Ratio Comparison

TUG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than INCM's 0.38% expense ratio.


Dividends

TUG vs. INCM - Dividend Comparison

TUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, less than INCM's 5.08% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
INCM
Franklin Income Focus ETF
5.08%4.96%5.06%3.01%0.00%
TUG
STF Tactical Growth ETF
1.43%1.75%4.97%1.34%1.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


TUG and INCM have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TUG has higher volatility (4.30%) compared to INCM (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TUG dropped -22.27% vs INCM's -7.84%.

On 1-year performance, TUG leads with 40.10% vs 15.73% for INCM. On fees, INCM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, INCM has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TUG has performed better with a 40.10% return vs 15.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

INCM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for TUG.

INCM has the higher dividend yield at 5.08%, compared with 1.43% for TUG.

They also come from different issuers: STF and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for TUG and 0.38% for INCM.

INCM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TUG and INCM

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