AAAU vs. MARB
AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) and MARB (First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price, while MARB is a Long-Short fund actively managed by First Trust. AAAU is passively managed, while MARB is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, AAAU returned 18.60%/yr vs 2.64%/yr for MARB. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AAAU charges 0.18%/yr vs 2.30%/yr for MARB.
Performance
AAAU vs. MARB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AAAU achieves a 3.83% return, which is significantly higher than MARB's 1.28% return.
AAAU
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- -1.63%
- YTD
- 3.83%
- 6M
- 6.34%
- 1Y
- 32.55%
- 3Y*
- 31.47%
- 5Y*
- 18.60%
- 10Y*
- —
MARB
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- YTD
- 1.28%
- 6M
- 1.49%
- 1Y
- 6.28%
- 3Y*
- 4.32%
- 5Y*
- 2.64%
- 10Y*
- —
AAAU vs. MARB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 3.83% | 64.06% | 26.91% | 12.96% | -0.50% | -4.01% | 21.88% |
MARB First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF | 1.28% | 7.02% | 0.73% | 2.16% | 3.89% | 0.26% | -2.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAAU and MARB is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2020 | 0.03 |
The correlation between AAAU and MARB shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AAAU vs. MARB — Risk / Return Rank
AAAU
MARB
AAAU vs. MARB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF (MARB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| AAAU | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.33 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.71 | 2.60 | -0.89 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.21 | 21.32 | -17.11 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AAAU | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.24 | 1.19 | +0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.05 | 0.62 | +0.43 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.09 | 0.36 | +0.73 |
Drawdowns
AAAU vs. MARB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAAU drawdown since its inception was -21.63%, which is greater than MARB's maximum drawdown of -11.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAAU and MARB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAAU | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.63% | -11.99% | -9.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.13% | -2.43% | -16.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.13% | -3.67% | -15.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.94% | -3.67% | -17.27% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.97% | 0.00% | -16.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.19% | -1.40% | -4.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.76% | 0.30% | +7.46% |
Volatility
AAAU vs. MARB - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) has a higher volatility of 5.51% compared to First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF (MARB) at 0.47%. This indicates that AAAU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MARB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAAU | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.51% | 0.47% | +5.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.94% | 2.18% | +20.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.33% | 5.30% | +21.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.83% | 4.26% | +13.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.99% | 5.60% | +11.39% |
AAAU vs. MARB - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAAU has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than MARB's 2.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
AAAU vs. MARB - Dividend Comparison
AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MARB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MARB First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF | 2.98% | 3.01% | 2.11% | 2.20% | 0.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAAU and MARB have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAAU has higher volatility (5.51%) compared to MARB (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAAU dropped -21.63% vs MARB's -11.99%.
On 5-year performance, AAAU leads with 18.60% vs 2.64% for MARB. On fees, AAAU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, MARB has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 18.60% return vs 2.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AAAU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 2.30% for MARB.
MARB has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 0.00% for AAAU.
AAAU is categorized as Gold, while MARB is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for AAAU and 2.30% for MARB.
AAAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 1.19), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for AAAU and MARB
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer