VRT vs ETN: Stock Returns, Risk & Volatility (2026)

Q: Which is a better investment: VRT or ETN?

Over the past year, VRT looks like the better investment: it had higher total return (VRT +184.1% vs ETN +30.3%) and a higher Sharpe ratio (VRT 1.88 vs ETN 0.82). On risk, ETN was less volatile (ETN 34.7% vs VRT 65.0%), ETN had a smaller max drawdown (ETN -19.1% vs VRT -37.5%), and ETN had less severe losses on the worst 5% of days (Expected Shortfall of ETN -5.09% vs VRT -8.94%).

Written by Gale Finance Team

Reviewed by Sid Kalla CFA Charterholder

Quick answer

Which is a better investment: VRT or ETN?

Over the past year, VRT outperformed (+184.1% vs +30.3%) with a Sharpe ratio of 1.88.

Total Return

VRT WIN +184.1%

ETN +30.3%

Sharpe Ratio

VRT WIN 1.88

ETN 0.82

Annualized Volatility

VRT 65.0%

ETN WIN 34.7%

Max Drawdown

VRT -37.5%

ETN WIN -19.1%

Analysis period: 2025-02-27 to 2026-02-25

VRT Total Return

↑ +184.1%

ETN Total Return

↑ +30.3%

Relative Performance of VRT vs ETN (Normalized to 100)

VRT ETN

Normalized to 100 at start date for comparison

Key Takeaways

Total Return: VRT delivered a +184.1% total return, while ETN returned +30.3% over the same period. VRT outperformed on total returns.
Risk-Adjusted Return (Sharpe Ratio): VRT had a higher Sharpe (1.88 vs 0.82), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.
Volatility (Annualized): VRT was more volatile, with 65.0% annualized volatility, versus 34.7% for ETN.
Maximum Drawdown: ETN's maximum drawdown was -19.1%, while VRT experienced a deeper drawdown of -37.5%.
Tail Risk (VaR & Expected Shortfall): At the 5% level (daily log returns), VRT's VaR was -6.48% and its Expected Shortfall (CVaR) was -8.94%; ETN's were -3.35% and -5.09%. VaR is the cutoff; Expected Shortfall is the average move on the worst days.
Skew & Kurtosis: Skew: VRT 0.24 vs ETN 0.06. Excess kurtosis: VRT 3.96 vs ETN 4.31. Negative skew leans downside; higher excess kurtosis means fatter tails.
Tail Days & Extremes: 2σ tail days (down/up): VRT 7/4, ETN 9/4. Worst day: VRT -12.50% (2025-04-03) vs ETN -8.10% (2025-04-03). Best day: VRT +24.49% (2026-02-11) vs ETN +12.76% (2025-04-09).
Risk ratios: Sortino - VRT: 3.04 vs. ETN: 1.21 , Calmar - VRT: 4.95 vs. ETN: 1.59 , Sterling - VRT: 6.93 vs. ETN: 1.39 , Treynor - VRT: 0.57 vs. ETN: 0.22 , Ulcer Index - VRT: 11.13% vs. ETN: 8.62%

Vertiv Holdings vs Eaton Corporation Correlation

0.74 Average Correlation

Vertiv Holdings and Eaton Corporation are strongly correlated over the past year. With a correlation of 0.74, these assets tend to move together, limiting diversification benefits.

For portfolio construction, this strong correlation means holding both VRT and ETN provides limited risk reduction — they're likely to decline together in downturns.

Metric	Value
Current (30-day)	0.68
Average (full period)	0.74
Minimum	0.41
Maximum	0.94

Correlation measures how closely two assets move together. Values near +1 indicate strong co-movement, near 0 indicates independence, and negative values indicate inverse movement.

Investment Comparison

If you invested $10,000 in each asset on February 27, 2025:

VRT $28,412.35 +184.1%

ETN $13,029.87 +30.3%

Difference: $15,382.48 (VRT ahead)

Vertiv Holdings and Eaton Corporation: Risk Analysis

Vertiv Holdings experienced its maximum drawdown of -37.5% from 2025-02-28 to 2025-04-04. It took 33 days to recover.

Eaton Corporation experienced its maximum drawdown of -19.1% from 2025-07-28 to 2025-12-17. It took 56 days to recover.

Smaller drawdowns and faster recoveries indicate lower downside risk and greater resilience during market stress.

Sharpe Ratio of VRT and ETN

VRT Sharpe Ratio

↑ 1.88

ETN Sharpe Ratio

↑ 0.82

Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk (volatility). A higher Sharpe indicates better risk-adjusted performance. VRT had a higher Sharpe (1.88 vs 0.82), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.

A Sharpe above 1.0 is generally considered good, above 2.0 is excellent. Negative Sharpe means the asset underperformed the risk-free rate. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Sortino Ratio of VRT and ETN

VRT Sortino Ratio

↑ 3.04

ETN Sortino Ratio

↑ 1.21

Sortino ratio measures return per unit of downside risk. Unlike Sharpe, it only counts downside deviation (returns below the target return). VRT had better downside-adjusted returns.

A higher Sortino is better. It's useful when upside volatility is common (crypto is the obvious example). Downside deviation: VRT 40.3% vs ETN 23.6%. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices, using the daily risk-free rate as the target return, and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Calmar Ratio of VRT and ETN

VRT Calmar Ratio

↑ 4.95

ETN Calmar Ratio

↑ 1.59

Calmar ratio compares CAGR to maximum drawdown. Higher Calmar means more return per unit of worst drawdown. VRT posted the higher Calmar ratio.

Calmar is computed on each asset's full 365-day lookback and uses the max drawdown over that same window.

Sterling Ratio of VRT and ETN

VRT Sterling Ratio

↑ 6.93

ETN Sterling Ratio

↑ 1.39

Sterling ratio measures excess return per unit of average drawdown (typically drawdowns worse than 10%). VRT posted the higher Sterling ratio.

Sterling uses average drawdown events deeper than 10% and subtracts the risk-free rate to report excess return.

Treynor Ratio of VRT and ETN

VRT Treynor Ratio

↑ 0.57

ETN Treynor Ratio

↑ 0.22

Treynor ratio measures excess return per unit of market risk (beta) instead of total volatility. VRT posted the higher Treynor ratio.

Treynor uses beta vs the S&P 500 (SPY) on shared dates and the average 3-month Treasury rate as the risk-free rate.

Ulcer Index of VRT and ETN

VRT Ulcer Index

11.13%

ETN Ulcer Index

8.62%

Ulcer Index captures drawdown depth and duration. Lower Ulcer Index means less drawdown pain. ETN had the lower Ulcer Index (less drawdown pain).

Ulcer Index is computed from each asset's drawdown series over the full lookback window.

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): Vertiv Holdings vs. Eaton Corporation

This section looks at the shape of daily returns, not just the average. Tail stats are computed per asset on its own daily series (crypto includes weekends). We use daily log returns $\ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)$ so multi-day moves add cleanly.

Definitions: Value at Risk (VaR), Expected Shortfall, skew, kurtosis, and fat tails.

Metric (1-Year)	VRT	ETN
5% VaR (daily log return)	-6.48%	-3.35%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-8.94% (worst 13 days)	-5.09% (worst 13 days)
Skew	0.24	0.06
Excess kurtosis	3.96	4.31
2σ tail days (down / up)	7 / 4	9 / 4
Worst day	-12.50% (2025-04-03)	-8.10% (2025-04-03)
Best day	+24.49% (2026-02-11)	+12.76% (2025-04-09)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Computed on shared dates only (n=249). A “2σ downside move” means a shared-close log return more than 2 standard deviations below that asset’s own mean on this shared-date series. Dates below show simple returns (%) for readability.

When ETN has a big down day, VRT also does

55.6%

5 / 9 days

When VRT has a big down day, ETN also does

71.4%

5 / 7 days

Show downside tail dates

Dates below are shared-date observations. The “Date” is the period end (close). Tail thresholds are computed on log returns, but the table shows simple returns (%) for readability. Returns are computed from the previous shared close to this one (for example, Friday → Monday includes weekend moves).

Days when both VRT and ETN had a big down day (2σ)

Date (interval)	VRT	ETN
2025-02-28 → 2025-03-03	-10.26%	-5.07%
2025-03-26	-10.88%	-4.83%
2025-04-03	-12.50%	-8.10%
2025-04-04	-11.95%	-5.49%
2025-12-12	-9.73%	-5.25%

Days when VRT had a big down day

Date (interval)	VRT	ETN
2025-02-28 → 2025-03-03	-10.26%	-5.07%
2025-03-07 → 2025-03-10	-8.25%	-2.22%
2025-03-26	-10.88%	-4.83%
2025-04-03	-12.50%	-8.10%
2025-04-04	-11.95%	-5.49%
2025-04-17 → 2025-04-21	-7.70%	-3.30%
2025-12-12	-9.73%	-5.25%

Days when ETN had a big down day

Date (interval)	VRT	ETN
2025-02-28 → 2025-03-03	-10.26%	-5.07%
2025-03-26	-10.88%	-4.83%
2025-04-03	-12.50%	-8.10%
2025-04-04	-11.95%	-5.49%
2025-04-10	-6.99%	-4.54%
2025-08-05	-1.03%	-7.36%
2025-11-20	-6.47%	-5.05%
2025-12-12	-9.73%	-5.25%
2025-12-17	-6.74%	-4.28%

Read this as “how ugly the ugly days get”, not as a precise forecast. One-year samples are small, so tail estimates are inherently noisy.

Vertiv Holdings vs Eaton Corporation Volatility (VRT vs ETN)

VRT Volatility

65.0%

±4.09% daily

ETN Volatility

34.7%

±2.19% daily

Typical daily swing

VRT

±4.09%

ETN

±2.19%

Vertiv Holdings's annualized volatility of 65.0% means it typically moves ±4.09% on any given day.

Eaton Corporation's annualized volatility of 34.7% means it typically moves ±2.19% on any given day.

VRT's higher volatility means a wider path to returns — this can be attractive for tactical, shorter-term exposure, while ETN's smoother profile may better suit long-term allocators seeking steadier growth.

For comparison, the S&P 500 typically has 15-18% annualized volatility, translating to roughly ±1% daily moves. Higher volatility means larger potential gains but also larger potential losses.

Vertiv Holdings vs Eaton Corporation Performance Over Time

Metric	VRT	ETN
30 Days	44.7%	12.4%
90 Days	52.4%	9.3%
180 Days	105.7%	7.3%
1 Year	184.1%	30.3%

Shorter time frames can show different leaders as market conditions change. Consider your investment horizon when comparing performance.

Full Comparison of Vertiv Holdings vs. Eaton Corporation (1-Year)

Metric	VRT	ETN
Total Return	+184.1%	+30.3%
Annualized Volatility	65.0%	34.7%
Sharpe Ratio	1.88	0.82
Sortino Ratio	3.04	1.21
Calmar Ratio	4.95	1.59
Sterling Ratio	6.93	1.39
Treynor Ratio	0.57	0.22
Ulcer Index	11.13%	8.62%
Max Drawdown	-37.5%	-19.1%
Avg Correlation to S&P 500	0.57	0.66
5% VaR (daily log return)	-6.48%	-3.35%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-8.94%	-5.09%
Skew	0.24	0.06
Excess kurtosis	3.96	4.31
2σ tail days (down / up)	7 / 4	9 / 4

Audit this calculation

Formulas, inputs, and conventions used to compute the metrics on this page.

Inputs & conventions

Shared window for pair metrics: 2025-02-27 → 2026-02-25 (last shared close).
Rolling correlation sample (shared closes): 220 rolling 30-day values (from 249 shared daily returns).
Annualization (days/year): VRT: 252 days/year; ETN: 252 days/year.
Risk-free rate: Uses the 3-month U.S. Treasury yield (FRED: DGS3MO), averaged over each asset’s window:

VRT: 4.20% over 2025-02-27 → 2026-02-25.

ETN: 4.20% over 2025-02-27 → 2026-02-25.
Volatility drag (rule of thumb): Estimated from annualized volatility (simple returns). For the log-return framing, see Log returns.

VRT: ≈ -21.1%/yr

ETN: ≈ -6.0%/yr
Data alignment: No forward fill. Correlation and tail co-moves are computed on shared closes only.
For cross-calendar pairs (e.g., crypto vs stocks), weekend/holiday moves roll into the next shared close.
Return conventions: Volatility/Sharpe/Sortino use simple daily returns. Tail-risk uses daily log returns for distribution stats (but tables show simple returns). Log returns.

Formulas

Daily simple return

r_t = \frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}} - 1

Volatility

\sigma_{ann} = \sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}

Volatility drag (approx.)

\text{drag} \approx \tfrac{1}{2}\sigma_{ann}^2

Sharpe Ratio

S = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}}

Sortino Ratio

So = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sqrt{\mathbb{E}[\min(0,\,r_t - r_f/A)^2]}\,\sqrt{A}}

Maximum Drawdown

MDD = \min_t\left(\frac{P_t}{\max_{s \le t} P_s} - 1\right)

Average Correlation

\rho = \frac{\operatorname{cov}(r^A,\,r^B)}{\sigma_A\,\sigma_B}

Log returns

\ell_t = \ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)

Notation

$P_t$: Price on day t.
$r_t$: Simple daily return.
$\ell_t$: Log daily return.
$\bar{r}$: Average daily return.
$\sigma(r_t)$: Standard deviation of daily returns.
$A$: Annualization factor (days/year).
$r_f$: Annual risk-free rate.

Vertiv Holdings vs Eaton Corporation: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: VRT or ETN?

VRT showed higher volatility at 65.0% annualized, compared to 34.7% for ETN Over the past year. Higher volatility means larger price swings in both directions.

Does VRT provide diversification when held with ETN?

VRT and ETN are strongly correlated over the past year, with an average correlation of 0.74. This strong correlation limits diversification benefits.

How bad are the worst 5% days for VRT vs ETN?

Over the past year, VRT's 5% VaR was -6.48% and its 5% Expected Shortfall was -8.94% (worst 13 days). ETN's were -3.35% and -5.09% (worst 13 days).

Do VRT and ETN crash together on bad days?

On shared dates (n=249), when ETN has a 2σ down day, VRT also does 55.6% (5/9 days). In the other direction, when VRT has one, ETN also does 71.4% (5/7 days).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: VRT or ETN?

VRT showed better risk-adjusted performance with a Sharpe ratio of 1.88 versus ETN's 0.82 Over the past year.

Can VRT and ETN be combined in a portfolio?

Yes, though allocation sizing matters. Their strong correlation provides limited risk reduction since they tend to move together. VRT's higher volatility (65.0%) means even small allocations can materially impact overall portfolio risk.