UMMA vs. CAOS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

UMMA (Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UMMA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Wahed, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, UMMA returned 18.50%/yr vs 3.48%/yr for CAOS. Their 0.04 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. UMMA charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

UMMA vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMMA achieves a 22.37% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.76% return.

UMMA

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: -4.45%
• 6M: 13.47%
• YTD: 22.37%
• 1Y: 42.50%
• 3Y*: 18.50%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.57%

CAOS

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -0.01%
• 6M: 0.16%
• YTD: 0.76%
• 1Y: 1.73%
• 3Y*: 3.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.70%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	$6.81M	$5.39M	$5.09M
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	$1.27M	$1.70M	$1.85M

UMMA vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	22.37%	26.65%	4.67%	11.43%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.76%	2.55%	5.33%	7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between UMMA and CAOS is -0.31, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.31
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.04

The correlation between UMMA and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.31 (1 year) to 0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

UMMA vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

UMMA

UMMA Risk / Return Rank: 74
UMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
UMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
UMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 73
UMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
UMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 56
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 48

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

UMMA vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	UMMA	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	1.19	+0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.28	1.89	+0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.24	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.76	2.47	+0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.85	5.45	+3.40

UMMA vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMMA and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

UMMA vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMMA drawdown since its inception was -34.17%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMMA and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMMA	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.17%	-3.89%	-30.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.93%	-0.76%	-14.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.73%	-3.60%	-15.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.31%	-1.13%	-9.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.69%	-0.92%	-8.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.65%	0.34%	+4.31%

Volatility

UMMA vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) has a higher volatility of 8.43% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. This indicates that UMMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMMA	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.43%	0.51%	+7.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.90%	1.07%	+20.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.40%	1.57%	+22.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.31%	4.18%	+17.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.31%	4.18%	+17.13%

UMMA vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

UMMA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

UMMA vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

UMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	0.99%	1.02%	0.91%	1.09%	1.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UMMA and CAOS in my portfolio?

UMMA and CAOS have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UMMA or CAOS?

UMMA has higher volatility (8.43%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMMA dropped -34.17% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, UMMA or CAOS?

On 3-year performance, UMMA leads with 18.50% vs 3.48% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMMA or CAOS?

Over the 3-year period, UMMA has performed better with a 18.50% return vs 3.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMMA or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UMMA or CAOS?

UMMA has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between UMMA and CAOS?

UMMA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Wahed and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for UMMA and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.19), 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.