UPAR vs. CEFS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UPAR (UPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF) and CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UPAR is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the NONE, while CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. UPAR is passively managed, while CEFS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, UPAR returned 10.72%/yr vs 22.04%/yr for CEFS. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UPAR charges 0.65%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for CEFS.

Performance

UPAR vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in UPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF (UPAR) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UPAR achieves a 9.98% return, which is significantly lower than CEFS's 13.75% return.

UPAR

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: 2.58%
• YTD: 9.98%
• 6M: 9.51%
• 1Y: 28.64%
• 3Y*: 10.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CEFS

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 4.35%
• YTD: 13.75%
• 6M: 15.64%
• 1Y: 25.00%
• 3Y*: 22.04%
• 5Y*: 13.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

UPAR vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
UPAR UPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF	9.98%	23.87%	-2.26%	5.73%	-30.30%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	13.75%	16.67%	23.48%	20.99%	-7.62%

Correlation

The correlation between UPAR and CEFS is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2022	0.45

UPAR vs. CEFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UPAR	CEFS
Technology	18.3%	12.4%
Energy	17.8%	11.2%
Basic Materials	16.7%	1.6%
Industrials	12.7%	6.7%
Financial Services	10.8%	48.9%
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	3.3%
Communication Services	5.2%	4.1%
Healthcare	5.0%	4.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	1.8%
Utilities	2.2%	4.2%
Real Estate	1.4%	1.2%

Return for Risk

UPAR vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

UPAR

UPAR Risk / Return Rank: 57
UPAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
UPAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
UPAR Omega Ratio Rank: 60
UPAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
UPAR Martin Ratio Rank: 51

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 80
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

UPAR vs. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF (UPAR) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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.

	UPAR	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.53	-0.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.80	3.71	-0.91
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.48	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.58	4.43	-1.84
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.53	17.26	-8.72
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UPAR vs. CEFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UPAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the CEFS Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UPAR and CEFS, 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

	UPAR	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.53	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.02	0.79	-0.82

Drawdowns

UPAR vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UPAR drawdown since its inception was -39.00%, roughly equal to the maximum CEFS drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UPAR and CEFS.

Drawdown Indicators

	UPAR	CEFS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.00%	-38.99%	-0.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.13%	-5.67%	-5.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.73%	-13.37%	-5.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.99%	-0.51%	-3.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.80%	-3.67%	-18.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.36%	1.45%	+1.91%

Volatility

UPAR vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison

UPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF (UPAR) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) at 3.37%. This indicates that UPAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UPAR	CEFS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.58%	3.37%	+1.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.44%	8.56%	+2.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.60%	9.95%	+3.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.04%	13.08%	+4.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.04%	15.33%	+2.71%

UPAR vs. CEFS - Expense Ratio Comparison

UPAR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFS's 1.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

UPAR vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison

UPAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.63%, less than CEFS's 7.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	7.10%	7.84%	8.79%	9.20%	11.32%	10.73%	8.61%	8.10%	10.43%	5.02%
UPAR UPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF	2.63%	3.28%	3.32%	3.04%	4.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UPAR and CEFS in my portfolio?

UPAR and CEFS have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UPAR or CEFS?

UPAR has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to CEFS (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UPAR dropped -39.00% vs CEFS's -38.99%.

Which ETF is better, UPAR or CEFS?

On 3-year performance, CEFS leads with 22.04% vs 10.72% for UPAR. On fees, UPAR is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, CEFS has been the lower-risk option at 3.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UPAR or CEFS?

Over the 3-year period, CEFS has performed better with a 22.04% return vs 10.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UPAR or CEFS?

UPAR is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for CEFS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UPAR or CEFS?

CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.10%, compared with 2.63% for UPAR.

What is the main difference between UPAR and CEFS?

UPAR is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CEFS is Event Driven. They also come from different issuers: RPAR and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for UPAR and 1.29% for CEFS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.12), 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.