CCSO vs RWLC
Carbon Collective Climate Solutions US Equity ETF vs Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor US Equity ETF
Which is better, CCSO or RWLC?
RWLC has been ahead.
RWLC has a lower expense ratio. RWLC led over 1Y. RWLC is less concentrated, with 37.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.5%.
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 | CCSO | RWLC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.32%Best |
| AUM | $43M | $98M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.64% | 12.72% |
| Holdings | 250 | 225 |
| YTD Return | -5.42% | +12.51%Best |
| 1Y Return | -3.57% | +10.78%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.20% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 50.5% | 37.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Carbon Collective Funds | The Advisors Inner Circle Fund |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 19, 2022 | Dec 15, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
CCSO vs RWLC 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
CCSO vs RWLC Performance
Carbon Collective Climate Solutions US Equity ETF (CCSO) is an ETF from Carbon Collective Funds and Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor US Equity ETF (RWLC) is an ETF from The Advisors Inner Circle Fund. Over the past year CCSO returned -3.57% while RWLC returned +10.78%. Year to date, CCSO is down 5.42% versus a gain of 12.51% for RWLC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CCSO charges 0.35% per year while RWLC charges 0.32%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $32 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CCSO currently yields 0.64% against 12.72% for RWLC.
Holdings Overlap
14.1% of CCSO's money is in holdings RWLC also owns. 2.1% of RWLC's money is in holdings CCSO also owns.
CCSO and RWLC share little of their money.
3 positions in common, counted across the 123 positions we hold weights for in CCSO and 108 in RWLC, against full books of 250 and 225.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 103 positions for RWLC that do not appear in our book for CCSO (97.5% of the fund), and 90 for CCSO that do not appear in RWLC (71.5%).
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 CCSO and RWLC 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, CCSO or RWLC?
CCSO has an expense ratio of 0.35% while RWLC charges 0.32%. RWLC is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CCSO or RWLC?
Over the past year CCSO returned -3.57% vs +10.78% for RWLC, so RWLC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CCSO and RWLC?
14.1% of CCSO's money is in holdings RWLC also owns. 2.1% of RWLC's is in holdings CCSO also owns. They hold 3 positions in common, counted across the 123 positions we hold weights for in CCSO and 108 in RWLC.
Which pays a higher dividend, CCSO or RWLC?
CCSO yields 0.64% while RWLC yields 12.72%, so RWLC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RWLC better than CCSO?
RWLC has a lower expense ratio. RWLC led over 1Y. RWLC is less concentrated, with 37.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.