CEFZ vs FOF
RiverNorth Active Income ETF vs Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund Inc.
Which is better, CEFZ or FOF?
FOF has been ahead.
FOF has a lower expense ratio. FOF led over 1Y and the full window. FOF is less concentrated, with 40.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CEFZ | FOF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.82% | 0.95%Best |
| AUM | $40M | $355M |
| Dividend Yield | 10.37% | 8.21% |
| Holdings | 92 | 106 |
| YTD Return | -5.41% | -0.73%Best |
| 1Y Return | -3.36% | +1.14%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.94% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +6.12% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.7%Best | 20.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -8.3%Best | -15.1% |
| $10,000 over 1.2 years | $10,121 | $10,465Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 50.3% | 40.7%Best |
| Fund Family | RiverNorth | Cohen & Steers Funds |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Style | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Inception | Dec 27, 2006 | Nov 20, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 4, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.2 years).
CEFZ vs FOF growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.2 years both funds cover.
CEFZ vs FOF Performance
RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ) is an ETF from RiverNorth and Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund Inc. (FOF) is an ETF from Cohen & Steers Funds. Over the past year CEFZ returned -3.36% while FOF returned +1.14%. Year to date, CEFZ is down 5.41% versus a loss of 0.73% for FOF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FOF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.3% compared with 9.7% for CEFZ. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -8.3% for CEFZ and -15.1% for FOF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.76. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CEFZ charges 2.82% per year while FOF charges 0.95%. On a $10,000 position that is $282 vs $95 annually, a gap of $187 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CEFZ currently yields 10.37% against 8.21% for FOF.
Holdings Overlap
23.9% of CEFZ's money is in holdings FOF also owns. 16.9% of FOF's money is in holdings CEFZ also owns.
CEFZ and FOF share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 73 days apart, CEFZ as of Sep 11, 2026 and FOF as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
13 positions in common, counted across the 45 positions we hold weights for in CEFZ and 113 in FOF, against full books of 92 and 106.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 93 positions for FOF that do not appear in our book for CEFZ (72.9% of the fund), and 30 for CEFZ that do not appear in FOF (71.6%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CEFZ | Weight in FOF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| PDIPIMCO Dynamic Income Fund | 2.91% | 4.28% | 1.37% |
| GOFGuggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund | 3.03% | 2.86% | 0.17% |
| NRGXPimco Energy & Tactical Credit Opportunities Fund | 1.04% | 4.38% | 3.34% |
| RMTRoyce Micro Cap Closed Fund | 3.90% | 0.05% | 3.85% |
| GABGabelli Equity Trust Closed Fund | 2.06% | 1.69% | 0.37% |
| FSSLFs Specialty Lending Fund | 2.92% | 0.63% | 2.29% |
| HYTBlackrock Corporate High Yield Fund, Inc. | 2.22% | 1.13% | 1.09% |
| KYNKayne Anderson Energy Infrastructure Fund Inc. | 2.46% | 0.48% | 1.98% |
| BPREBluerock Private Real Estate | 0.93% | 0.41% | 0.52% |
| BRWVoya Prime Rate Trust | 0.97% | 0.00% | 0.97% |
23.9% of CEFZ is already inside FOF.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CEFZ or FOF?
CEFZ has an expense ratio of 2.82% while FOF charges 0.95%. FOF is the cheaper option, by $187 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CEFZ or FOF?
Over the past year CEFZ returned -3.36% vs +1.14% for FOF, so FOF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), CEFZ annualized +1.01% vs +3.86% for FOF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CEFZ or FOF?
FOF has been the more volatile fund at 20.3% annualized versus 9.7% for CEFZ. Worst drawdown: CEFZ -8.3% vs FOF -15.1%.
Should I hold both CEFZ and FOF?
CEFZ and FOF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.76, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CEFZ and FOF?
23.9% of CEFZ's money is in holdings FOF also owns. 16.9% of FOF's is in holdings CEFZ also owns. They hold 13 positions in common, counted across the 45 positions we hold weights for in CEFZ and 113 in FOF.
Which pays a higher dividend, CEFZ or FOF?
CEFZ yields 10.37% while FOF yields 8.21%, so CEFZ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FOF better than CEFZ?
FOF has a lower expense ratio. FOF led over 1Y and the full window. FOF is less concentrated, with 40.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.