PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XRLX vs. TBFG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XRLX vs. TBFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) and The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XRLX achieves a 7.78% return, which is significantly lower than TBFG's 10.44% return.


XRLX

1D
-0.07%
1M
3.65%
YTD
7.78%
6M
8.03%
1Y
17.55%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

TBFG

1D
0.08%
1M
3.51%
YTD
10.44%
6M
11.28%
1Y
24.15%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XRLX vs. TBFG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
XRLX
FundX Conservative ETF
7.78%7.85%17.32%
TBFG
The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF
10.44%14.56%10.48%

Correlation

The correlation between XRLX and TBFG is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024

0.90

The correlation between XRLX and TBFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

XRLX vs. TBFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XRLX
TBFG

Technology

36.8%
21.5%

Financial Services

12.1%
17.7%

Communication Services

11.9%
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
8.4%

Industrials

7.1%
13.3%

Healthcare

6.6%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
5.8%

Energy

3.3%
7.0%

Utilities

3.2%
3.4%

Basic Materials

2.7%
6.0%

Real Estate

1.4%
2.4%

Technology

XRLX
36.8%
TBFG
21.5%

Financial Services

XRLX
12.1%
TBFG
17.7%

Communication Services

XRLX
11.9%
TBFG
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

XRLX
10.0%
TBFG
8.4%

Industrials

XRLX
7.1%
TBFG
13.3%

Healthcare

XRLX
6.6%
TBFG
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

XRLX
4.9%
TBFG
5.8%

Energy

XRLX
3.3%
TBFG
7.0%

Utilities

XRLX
3.2%
TBFG
3.4%

Basic Materials

XRLX
2.7%
TBFG
6.0%

Real Estate

XRLX
1.4%
TBFG
2.4%

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

XRLX vs. TBFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XRLX
XRLX Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
XRLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XRLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
XRLX Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
XRLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
XRLX Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

TBFG
TBFG Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
TBFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TBFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
TBFG Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
TBFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
TBFG Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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.

XRLX vs. TBFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) and The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG). 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.


XRLXTBFGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.36

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.46

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.81

3.18

-0.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.67

13.74

-1.07

XRLX vs. TBFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XRLX Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the TBFG Sharpe Ratio of 2.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XRLX and TBFG, 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


XRLXTBFGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.18

2.49

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.41

1.39

+0.02

Drawdowns

XRLX vs. TBFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XRLX drawdown since its inception was -15.33%, which is greater than TBFG's maximum drawdown of -13.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRLX and TBFG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XRLXTBFGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.33%

-13.43%

-1.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.28%

-7.63%

+1.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.54%

-0.28%

-0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.70%

-1.62%

-0.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.39%

1.76%

-0.37%

Volatility

XRLX vs. TBFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FundX Conservative ETF (XRLX) is 2.55%, while The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) has a volatility of 2.91%. This indicates that XRLX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TBFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XRLXTBFGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.55%

2.91%

-0.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.64%

8.00%

-1.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.10%

9.73%

-1.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.04%

10.94%

+0.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.04%

10.94%

+0.10%

XRLX vs. TBFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XRLX has a 1.63% expense ratio, which is higher than TBFG's 0.42% expense ratio.


Dividends

XRLX vs. TBFG - Dividend Comparison

XRLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.57%, more than TBFG's 2.35% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
TBFG
The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF
2.35%2.65%2.43%0.00%
XRLX
FundX Conservative ETF
2.57%2.77%1.66%1.68%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, XRLX and TBFG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

TBFG has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to XRLX (2.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XRLX dropped -15.33% vs TBFG's -13.43%.

On 1-year performance, TBFG leads with 24.15% vs 17.55% for XRLX. On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, XRLX has been the lower-risk option at 2.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TBFG has performed better with a 24.15% return vs 17.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 1.63% for XRLX.

XRLX has the higher dividend yield at 2.57%, compared with 2.35% for TBFG.

They also come from different issuers: FundX and The Brinsmere Funds. Their fees differ too: 1.63% for XRLX and 0.42% for TBFG.

TBFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.49 vs 2.18), 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 XRLX and TBFG

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