UX vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UX is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, UX returned 17.18% vs 1.88% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. UX charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

UX vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) 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, UX achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than CAOS's 0.82% return.

UX

• 1D: -2.53%
• 1M: -3.11%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: 6.59%
• 1Y: 17.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: 0.82%
• 6M: 0.69%
• 1Y: 1.88%
• 3Y*: 4.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UX vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	-0.61%	15.76%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.82%	2.30%

Correlation

The correlation between UX and CAOS is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	-0.19

UX vs. CAOS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UX	CAOS
Energy	100.0%	4.1%
Basic Materials	-	1.9%
Communication Services	-	10.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.4%
Financial Services	-	12.4%
Healthcare	-	9.6%
Industrials	-	8.5%
Real Estate	-	2.0%
Technology	-	33.1%
Utilities	-	2.6%

Return for Risk

UX vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

UX

UX Risk / Return Rank: 17
UX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
UX Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
UX Omega Ratio Rank: 18
UX Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
UX Martin Ratio Rank: 16

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 40
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

UX vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) 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.

	UX	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	1.24	-0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.93	1.98	-1.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.26	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	2.49	-1.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.45	6.22	-4.77
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UX vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UX Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UX 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UX	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	1.24	-0.74
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	1.21	-0.90

Drawdowns

UX vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	UX	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.72%	-3.60%	-20.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.72%	-0.76%	-22.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.59%	-1.07%	-18.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.13%	-0.90%	-9.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.87%	0.30%	+11.57%

Volatility

UX vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) has a higher volatility of 8.07% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.26%. This indicates that UX'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

	UX	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.07%	0.26%	+7.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.59%	1.03%	+23.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.45%	1.52%	+32.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.20%	4.26%	+31.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.20%	4.26%	+31.94%

UX vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

UX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

UX vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	1.49%	1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UX and CAOS in my portfolio?

UX and CAOS have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UX or CAOS?

UX has higher volatility (8.07%) compared to CAOS (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -23.72% vs CAOS's -3.60%.

Which ETF is better, UX or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, UX leads with 17.18% vs 1.88% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UX or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, UX has performed better with a 17.18% return vs 1.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UX or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UX.

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

UX has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between UX and CAOS?

UX is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UX and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 0.50), 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.