CEFZ vs LCR
RiverNorth Active Income ETF vs Leuthold Core ETF
Which is better, CEFZ or LCR?
Each has led over a different period.
LCR has a lower expense ratio. CEFZ led over 1Y, LCR over the full window. CEFZ is less concentrated, with 50.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 65.1%.
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 | LCR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.82% | 0.83%Best |
| AUM | $40M | $66M |
| Dividend Yield | 10.37% | 1.30% |
| Holdings | 92 | 68 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.7%Best | 10.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -8.3%Best | -17.4% |
| Top 10 Weight | 50.3%Best | 65.1% |
| Fund Family | RiverNorth | Leuthold Funds |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Style | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Inception | Dec 27, 2006 | Jan 3, 2020 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), $10,000 over the window.
The two price series end 635 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. CEFZ has data through Oct 14, 2026 and LCR through Jan 17, 2025.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LCR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 10.1% 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 -17.4% for LCR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CEFZ charges 2.82% per year while LCR charges 0.83%. On a $10,000 position that is $282 vs $83 annually, a gap of $199 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CEFZ currently yields 10.37% against 1.30% for LCR.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 45 holdings in CEFZ and 33 in LCR, totalling 99.8% and 95.5% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 45 positions we hold weights for in CEFZ and 33 in LCR, against full books of 92 and 68.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 33 positions for LCR that do not appear in our book for CEFZ (95.5% of the fund), and 43 for CEFZ that do not appear in LCR (95.4%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CEFZ and LCR you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CEFZ or LCR?
CEFZ has an expense ratio of 2.82% while LCR charges 0.83%. LCR is the cheaper option, by $199 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, CEFZ or LCR?
LCR has been the more volatile fund at 10.1% annualized versus 9.7% for CEFZ. Worst drawdown: CEFZ -8.3% vs LCR -17.4%.
Which pays a higher dividend, CEFZ or LCR?
CEFZ yields 10.37% while LCR yields 1.30%, so CEFZ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LCR better than CEFZ?
LCR has a lower expense ratio. CEFZ led over 1Y, LCR over the full window. CEFZ is less concentrated, with 50.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 65.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.