XRLX vs. EINC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

XRLX (FundX Conservative ETF) and EINC (VanEck Energy Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XRLX is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by FundX, while EINC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS North America Energy Infrastructure Index. XRLX is actively managed, while EINC is passively managed. Over the past year, XRLX returned 17.73% vs 27.21% for EINC. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XRLX charges 1.63%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EINC.

Performance

XRLX vs. EINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) and VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XRLX achieves a 7.55% return, which is significantly lower than EINC's 24.27% return.

XRLX

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 1.28%
• YTD: 7.55%
• 6M: 7.48%
• 1Y: 17.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EINC

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -5.79%
• YTD: 24.27%
• 6M: 25.77%
• 1Y: 27.21%
• 3Y*: 29.77%
• 5Y*: 20.86%
• 10Y*: 11.88%

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

XRLX vs. EINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XRLX FundX Conservative ETF	7.55%	7.85%	17.61%	7.14%
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	24.27%	7.11%	42.79%	8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between XRLX and EINC is -0.09, 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	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 9, 2023	0.19

The correlation between XRLX and EINC shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XRLX vs. EINC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XRLX	EINC
Technology	37.5%	-
Financial Services	12.4%	-
Communication Services	11.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	-
Industrials	8.7%	2.5%
Healthcare	6.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	-
Energy	3.7%	99.4%
Basic Materials	3.0%	-
Utilities	2.9%	0.6%
Real Estate	1.5%	-

Return for Risk

XRLX vs. EINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

XRLX

XRLX Risk / Return Rank: 65
XRLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
XRLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
XRLX Omega Ratio Rank: 66
XRLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
XRLX Martin Ratio Rank: 68

EINC

EINC Risk / Return Rank: 57
EINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
EINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EINC Omega Ratio Rank: 52
EINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
EINC Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

XRLX vs. EINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) and VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC). 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.

	XRLX	EINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	1.82	+0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	2.47	+0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.32	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	3.47	-0.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.32	8.82	+3.49

XRLX vs. EINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XRLX Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the EINC Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XRLX and EINC, 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

XRLX vs. EINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XRLX drawdown since its inception was -15.33%, smaller than the maximum EINC drawdown of -87.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRLX and EINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	XRLX	EINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.33%	-87.55%	+72.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.28%	-7.89%	+1.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.87%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-68.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.75%	-5.79%	+5.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.70%	-44.16%	+42.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.44%	3.09%	-1.65%

Volatility

XRLX vs. EINC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) is 3.64%, while VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) has a volatility of 6.32%. This indicates that XRLX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XRLX	EINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.64%	6.32%	-2.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.31%	11.86%	-4.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.70%	15.07%	-6.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.13%	19.54%	-8.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.13%	25.43%	-14.30%

XRLX vs. EINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

XRLX has a 1.63% expense ratio, which is higher than EINC's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

XRLX vs. EINC - Dividend Comparison

XRLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, less than EINC's 3.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	3.56%	4.51%	3.33%	3.77%	2.89%	6.03%	6.69%	9.66%	11.31%	8.53%	9.71%	28.53%
XRLX FundX Conservative ETF	2.58%	2.77%	1.66%	1.68%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XRLX and EINC in my portfolio?

XRLX and EINC have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XRLX or EINC?

EINC has higher volatility (6.32%) compared to XRLX (3.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XRLX dropped -15.33% vs EINC's -87.55%.

Which ETF is better, XRLX or EINC?

On 1-year performance, EINC leads with 27.21% vs 17.73% for XRLX. On fees, EINC is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, XRLX has been the lower-risk option at 3.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XRLX or EINC?

Over the 1-year period, EINC has performed better with a 27.21% return vs 17.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XRLX or EINC?

EINC is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.63% for XRLX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XRLX or EINC?

EINC has the higher dividend yield at 3.56%, compared with 2.58% for XRLX.

What is the main difference between XRLX and EINC?

XRLX is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while EINC is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: FundX and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 1.63% for XRLX and 0.45% for EINC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XRLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.82), 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.