CLSM vs TBFC
ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF vs The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF
Which is better, CLSM or TBFC?
CLSM has been ahead.
TBFC has a lower expense ratio. CLSM led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | CLSM | TBFC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.82% | 0.44%Best |
| AUM | $99M | $358M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.75% | 3.17% |
| Holdings | 10 | 26 |
| YTD Return | +19.29%Best | +3.19% |
| 1Y Return | +20.79%Best | +5.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.20% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.83% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.6% | 6.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -14.6% | -10.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.7 years | $14,180Best | $12,282 |
| Fund Family | The Cabana Group, LLC | Brinsmere Fund |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Style | Equity-oriented Balanced | Equity-oriented Balanced |
| Inception | Jul 12, 2021 | Jan 12, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 16, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.7 years).
CLSM vs TBFC 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 2.7 years both funds cover.
CLSM vs TBFC Performance
ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) is an ETF from The Cabana Group, LLC and The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) is an ETF from Brinsmere Fund. Over the past year CLSM returned +20.79% while TBFC returned +5.54%. Year to date, CLSM is up 19.29% versus a gain of 3.19% for TBFC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CLSM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.6% compared with 6.6% for TBFC. 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 -14.6% for CLSM and -10.0% for TBFC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CLSM charges 0.82% per year while TBFC charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $82 vs $44 annually, a gap of $38 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CLSM currently yields 0.75% against 3.17% for TBFC.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 4 holdings in CLSM and 25 in TBFC, totalling 99.6% and 99.8% 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 4 positions we hold weights for in CLSM and 25 in TBFC, against full books of 10 and 26.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 4 and 25 positions we hold weights for.
CLSM holds 4 positions TBFC does not, 99.6% of the fund.
Largest: XLK 35.26%, QQQM 31.14%, XLP 25.80%, AAAU 7.44%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CLSM and TBFC 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, CLSM or TBFC?
CLSM has an expense ratio of 0.82% while TBFC charges 0.44%. TBFC is the cheaper option, by $38 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CLSM or TBFC?
Over the past year CLSM returned +20.79% vs +5.54% for TBFC, so CLSM leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CLSM or TBFC?
CLSM has been the more volatile fund at 11.6% annualized versus 6.6% for TBFC. Worst drawdown: CLSM -14.6% vs TBFC -10.0%.
Should I hold both CLSM and TBFC?
CLSM and TBFC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, CLSM or TBFC?
CLSM yields 0.75% while TBFC yields 3.17%, so TBFC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TBFC better than CLSM?
TBFC has a lower expense ratio. CLSM led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.