RPAR risk parity

RPAR Risk Parity ETF (ARIS risk-parity allocation)

Alex Shahidi and Damien Bisserier, Advanced Research Investment Solutions (ARIS); fund sponsor RPAR LLC (Evoke), adviser Toroso Investments (Tidal) · 2019 (fund launched 2019-12-12)

Live account on this site. This portfolio is also tracked here with a virtual $100,000 since 21.10.2026. Live account on this site →

Where it stands today

Data through 2026-09. Updated every month.

Since January+7.2 %

Last 12 months+9.9 %

Last 5 years, per year+5.9 %

Now below the peak−2.1 %

Place by 12 months31 / 60

Our calculation, 1984-02 – 2026-09

Per year8.1 %

Real (after inflation)5.1 %

Volatility7.3 %

Worst drop−23.6 %

Worst year−13.5 % (2008)

Best year24.3 %

Worst 12 months−21.4 %

Positive years80 %

15 % of this history is calculated with stand-ins for asset classes that did not exist yet (see “How we model it” and the page about data). Without stand-ins the history starts in 2000.

Growth of $10,000

RPAR risk parity: $278,552S&P 500: $1,163,109

Where it came from

RPAR is an actively managed exchange-traded fund that tries to match the exposures of the Advanced Research Risk Parity Index, a rules-based index built by ARIS. The fund began trading on 12 December 2019. Its prospectus names Toroso Investments (a Tidal Financial Group company) as adviser, ARIS as index provider and RPAR, LLC (a subsidiary of Evoke Holdings) as sponsor.

ARIS was set up in 2014 by Alex Shahidi, who had spent about 15 years at Merrill Lynch, and Damien Bisserier, a former Bridgewater associate and adviser. In August 2019 a news article described the planned fund as a Ray Dalio-inspired risk-parity ETF that would give more money to lower-volatility assets, with inflation-protected securities expected to be the heaviest holding. At that time the article reported ARIS client portfolios of roughly 12 billion dollars and the aim of offering the approach to ordinary investors rather than only large institutions.

The idea is risk parity: instead of splitting capital equally, the index aims to give each of four asset classes an equal share of risk, using long-run volatility. Because TIPS are the calmest sleeve they get the largest dollar weight, and equities and commodities get less. The prospectus states a 25 % risk target for each of the four sleeves.

The prospectus target asset allocation is 35 % long-term TIPS (15+ years), 25 % global equities (US, non-US developed and emerging), 25 % commodities (commodity-producer equities and gold) and 15 % US Treasuries. The 15 % in Treasuries is T-bills held as collateral for Treasury futures (10-year note and Ultra bond futures); the total notional Treasury exposure is stated to exceed 15 %, so the fund is in effect leveraged and its headline weights are not the full exposure. The index is rebalanced quarterly.

The fund held up well in 2020 (about +19 %) but lost 22.81 % in 2022 when both stocks and long bonds fell, a result the fund's own filings show alongside a much smaller loss for a 60/40 benchmark. It was nearly flat in 2024. This history is short (since December 2019), so any backtest before that is a reconstruction by us, not a track record.

What is in it

Long-term TIPS (15+ years)	35%	target asset allocation, prospectus dated 2023-04-27; risk target 25 %
Global equities (US, non-US developed, emerging)	25%	risk target 25 %; split between regions not stated in the prospectus
Commodities (commodity-producer equities and gold)	25%	risk target 25 %; the 2024 annual report cites gold 10 % and commodity-producer equities 15 %
US Treasuries (T-bills collateralising 10-year and Ultra bond futures)	15%	headline weight; total notional exposure stated to exceed 15 %, amount not given; risk target 25 %

Source of the shares: Tidal ETF Trust, RPAR Risk Parity ETF, prospectus (Form 485BPOS) dated 27 April 2023 — www.sec.gov. Table of target risk and target asset allocation for the four sleeves, description of the quarterly index rebalance and of the Treasury futures. The 2024 shareholder report (url in sources) repeats the figures gold 10 % and commodity-producer equities 15 % when explaining the year's results. The most recent prospectus (2026) was not opened, see uncertain.

How we model it

Inflation-protected bonds (TIPS)	35%
Intermediate government bonds (10 y)	15%
Commodities	15%
US large companies (S&P 500)	12.5%
Gold	10%
Emerging markets	7.5%
Developed markets outside the US	5%

TIPS 35 % -> tips (our TIPS series is not long-duration, so the real fund is more rate-sensitive than the mapped class). US Treasuries 15 % -> bond_mid, as a stand-in for the 10-year futures; the leverage from futures (notional above 15 %) is NOT modelled, so our version is a plain unlevered 100 % portfolio and is calmer than the real fund. Equities 25 % are split 12.5 / 5 / 7.5 (US / developed ex-US / emerging) copying the relative sizes of the three Vanguard ETFs the fund held in a March 2026 holdings listing (VTI about 12.4 %, VEA about 4.8 %, VWO about 7.3 % of assets); the prospectus gives no split, so this is an approximation; US equities go to us_large. Gold 10 % -> gold (the fund holds it through GLDM). Commodity-producer equities 15 % -> commodities, an imperfect proxy because producer stocks are equities and not futures indices.

For a euro investor

The same portfolio bought with euros, without currency hedging: monthly returns converted at the end-of-month rate (German mark before 1999), inflation of the euro area. History in euros from 1984-02 to 2026-09.

Per year in euros6.9 %

After euro inflation4.6 %

Worst drop in euros−31.9 %

Worst year in euros−16.2 % (1987)

Safe withdrawal, 30 years, dollars6.16 % (1994-02)

Safe withdrawal, 30 years, euros4.72 % (1985-03)

The largest first-year withdrawal, then growing with inflation, that lasted 30 years from every monthly start. Test withdrawals for this portfolio →

How to build it with European funds

Examples of UCITS funds sold in the EU for each part of the portfolio. They track similar markets, not exactly the indices of our calculation.

Part	Share	Example funds (ISIN)
Inflation-protected bonds (TIPS)	35%	iShares USD TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) `IE00B1FZSC47`
Intermediate government bonds (10 y)	15%	iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF (Dist) `IE00B1FZS798`
Commodities	15%	iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF `IE00BDFL4P12`
US large companies (S&P 500)	12.5%	iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) `IE00B5BMR087` Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS ETF (USD) Distributing `IE00B3XXRP09`
Gold	10%	Invesco Physical Gold ETC `IE00B579F325` Xetra-Gold `DE000A0S9GB0`
Emerging markets	7.5%	iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (Acc) `IE00BKM4GZ66`
Developed markets outside the US (closest match)	5%	iShares Core MSCI Europe UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) `IE00B4K48X80` iShares Core MSCI Japan IMI UCITS ETF `IE00B4L5YX21`

These are examples, not recommendations. Check the fund's key information document, costs and taxes with your broker before buying. Names and ISINs checked on justETF on 4 November 2026; Udak receives nothing from these funds.

The idea

Equalise risk across four economic environments (growth up or down, inflation up or down) by holding more of the low-volatility assets, so that no single asset class dominates the portfolio's risk. Closely related to Dalio's All Weather idea but built from rules and a fixed set of four sleeves.

How people buy it

The ETF RPAR itself (expense ratio about 0.5 % per third-party listings). Holdings are Treasury futures, T-bills, TIPS, broad equity ETFs (VTI, VEA, VWO), SPDR Gold MiniShares and direct stocks of mining and energy producers.

Rebalancing as published

The index is rebalanced quarterly and the fund trades to follow it. The weights are fixed targets; the actual exposure after the quarterly rebalance is set to equalise the long-run risk shares.

Variants

Other risk-parity ETFs and funds (for example UPAR, RSBT) use different sleeves and leverage and are not covered here.
Ray Dalio's All Weather / All Seasons is modelled separately as m_dalio.
ARIS also runs a more heavily leveraged version for clients; its weights were not found.

Criticism

Heavy dependence on long-duration TIPS and long Treasuries: in 2022 the combination lost 22.81 % in a year, worse than the S&P 500 (-18.11 %) and a 60/40 portfolio (-15.79 %) (fund prospectus table).
Since inception (12/12/2019) through end-2024 it returned 1.19 % a year against 14.82 % for the S&P 500 and 8.86 % for a 60/40 benchmark (fund annual report).
Use of futures leverage makes the real fund riskier than the headline weights suggest, and a plain unlevered backtest differs from it.
The track record is only about six years long.

Through the eras

Era	Dates	Total	Per year	Worst drop	S&P 500
Black Monday	1987-08 – 1987-12	−5.4 %	—	−8.1 %	−21.8 %
Savings-and-loan crisis and 1990 recession	1990-07 – 1991-03	+7.3 %	—	−1.1 %	+7.4 %
1994 bond market massacre	1994-02 – 1994-12	−4.6 %	—	−5.9 %	−3.2 %
Asian and Russian financial crises	1997-07 – 1998-10	+6.8 %	+5.1 %	−5.4 %	+22.4 %
Dot-com bubble and crash	2000-03 – 2002-10	+6.0 %	+2.2 %	−6.1 %	−37.2 %
Recovery and housing boom	2002-11 – 2007-09	+91.7 %	+14.2 %	−4.1 %	+97.0 %
Global financial crisis	2007-10 – 2009-03	−8.6 %	−5.8 %	−23.6 %	−44.7 %
The decade after the crisis	2009-04 – 2019-12	+94.4 %	+6.4 %	−13.2 %	+411.2 %
Fourth-quarter 2018 sell-off	2018-09 – 2018-12	−5.8 %	—	−5.8 %	−14.4 %
Covid crash and stimulus boom	2020-02 – 2021-12	+23.7 %	+11.7 %	−8.8 %	+53.6 %
Inflation shock and rate hikes	2022-01 – 2022-12	−9.9 %	−9.9 %	−14.5 %	−19.9 %

Calendar years

Any N-year period

Any N-year period	Worst	10 % worse than	Median	10 % better than	Best
1 y (501)	−21.4 %	−2.1 %	+9.3 %	+18.2 %	+30.0 %
3 y (477)	−3.7 %	+2.2 %	+7.9 %	+13.4 %	+19.6 %
5 y (453)	+0.7 %	+2.6 %	+8.2 %	+11.7 %	+15.2 %
10 y (393)	+2.6 %	+4.3 %	+8.4 %	+10.6 %	+11.8 %
15 y (333)	+4.0 %	+5.2 %	+8.2 %	+9.4 %	+10.5 %
20 y (273)	+6.0 %	+6.3 %	+7.8 %	+9.6 %	+10.0 %
30 y (153)	+6.5 %	+6.9 %	+7.6 %	+8.7 %	+9.6 %

How it behaved in history

2020 (Covid shock and recovery). Fund returned about +19 % in 2020; best quarter +11.03 % in Q2 2020. No data before December 2019 exists for the fund. www.sec.gov
2022 (stocks and bonds fall together). The worst year: -22.81 %, with the worst quarter -15.80 % in Q2 2022, because long TIPS, long Treasuries, equities and commodity-producer stocks were not all offsetting each other. www.sec.gov
2024. Nearly flat (-0.11 %): global equities and gold gained, while long Treasuries, long TIPS and commodity-producer stocks fell. www.sec.gov
before 2019. No published track record. The fund's launch article argued that risk parity had lagged during a long bull market while long Treasuries and gold had recently done well. Any earlier behaviour (1970s inflation, 2008) is our own reconstruction from the asset-class series. www.financial-planning.com

Published results (by others)

Calendar-year returns 2020, 2021, 2022 (2020-2022): +19.35 %, +7.78 %, -22.81 % www.sec.gov
Best and worst quarters to end-2022 (2019-12 to 2022-12): best +11.03 % (Q2 2020); worst -15.80 % (Q2 2022) www.sec.gov
Average annual return since inception to 2022-12-31: fund vs S&P 500 TR, 60/40 and the ARIS index (2019-12-12 to 2022-12-31): fund -0.02 %, S&P 500 8.24 %, 60/40 4.22 %, ARIS index 1.28 % www.sec.gov
2024 return and annualised returns to 2024-12-31 (to 2024-12-31): 2024 -0.11 % (index +0.63 %); 5-year 1.07 %; since inception 1.19 % a year www.sec.gov
2021 return (2021): +7.78 % NAV, about +19 % in 2020 www.sec.gov

What we could not verify

Current weights: the most recent document read was the April 2023 prospectus plus the 2024 annual report; the 2026 prospectus and holdings page (rparetf.com) were not retrieved, the main site gave no allocation figures.
Split of the 25 % equity sleeve between US, developed ex-US and emerging markets: not published in the documents read; our split is based on a third-party holdings listing (Robinhood, March 2026), not on a fund document.
Exact notional Treasury exposure (the filing says only above 15 %) and the fund's real leverage.
Gold 10 % and producers 15 % come from the 2024 shareholder report's explanatory text (the report's listed targets add to 120 %, so the sleeves there look like notional weights); the 2021 report shows gold at about 9 % of investments.
Third-party sites disagree on calendar-year returns (one lists -25.7 % for 2022); we use the fund's own filings only.
Total expense ratio about 0.5 % comes from third-party listings, not checked in the prospectus.

Sources

www.sec.gov https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1742912/000183988223011044/rpar_485bpos-042723.htm
www.sec.gov https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1742912/000183988225014792/rpar-ncsr_123124.htm
www.sec.gov https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1742912/000138713122003487/rpar-ncsr_123121.htm
www.financial-planning.com https://www.financial-planning.com/articles/ray-dalio-inspired-a-new-risk-parity-etf
www.rparetf.com https://www.rparetf.com
www.etfstrategy.com https://www.etfstrategy.com/aris-debuts-with-multi-asset-risk-parity-etf-rpar-risk-parity-etf-rpar-us-95953
robinhood.com https://robinhood.com/us/en/stocks/RPAR/

Open in the builder

Put this card on your site →

Calculated on historical data. Past results do not predict the future. Models before the 1990s use stand-ins for classes that had no index yet; fees, taxes and fund costs are not included. This is mathematics, not an investment recommendation.