ACMDX vs. GPIFX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ACMDX (Absolute Capital Defender Fund) and GPIFX (GuidePath Flexible Income Allocation Fund) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Over the past 10 years, ACMDX returned 4.60%/yr vs 2.78%/yr for GPIFX. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACMDX charges 2.70%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for GPIFX.

Performance

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) and GuidePath Flexible Income Allocation Fund (GPIFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACMDX achieves a 5.76% return, which is significantly higher than GPIFX's 2.20% return. Over the past 10 years, ACMDX has outperformed GPIFX with an annualized return of 4.60%, while GPIFX has yielded a comparatively lower 2.78% annualized return.

ACMDX

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 2.94%
• YTD: 5.76%
• 6M: 5.86%
• 1Y: 13.51%
• 3Y*: 9.71%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: 4.60%

GPIFX

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 2.20%
• 6M: 2.40%
• 1Y: 6.75%
• 3Y*: 4.81%
• 5Y*: 0.49%
• 10Y*: 2.78%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ACMDX Absolute Capital Defender Fund	5.76%	8.56%	9.61%	8.51%	-15.26%	12.00%	5.14%	7.12%	-5.93%	8.32%
GPIFX GuidePath Flexible Income Allocation Fund	2.20%	3.69%	4.22%	7.13%	-14.14%	1.17%	15.17%	6.64%	-2.48%	6.83%

Correlation

The correlation between ACMDX and GPIFX is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.49
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2016	0.49

The correlation between ACMDX and GPIFX shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (5 years) to 0.62 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ACMDX vs. GPIFX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACMDX

ACMDX Risk / Return Rank: 53
ACMDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
ACMDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
ACMDX Omega Ratio Rank: 47
ACMDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
ACMDX Martin Ratio Rank: 61

GPIFX

GPIFX Risk / Return Rank: 87
GPIFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
GPIFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
GPIFX Omega Ratio Rank: 89
GPIFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
GPIFX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) and GuidePath Flexible Income Allocation Fund (GPIFX). 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.

	ACMDX	GPIFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.82	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.96	4.13	-1.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.63	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.00	4.01	-1.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.11	18.30	-6.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACMDX Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the GPIFX Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACMDX and GPIFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ACMDX	GPIFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	2.82	-0.78
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.10	+0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	0.52	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.47	-0.01

Drawdowns

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACMDX drawdown since its inception was -17.63%, which is greater than GPIFX's maximum drawdown of -16.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACMDX and GPIFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACMDX	GPIFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.63%	-16.72%	-0.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.63%	-1.69%	-2.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.50%	-4.14%	-7.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.63%	-16.72%	-0.91%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.63%	-16.72%	-0.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.20%	+0.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.18%	-4.03%	-1.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.15%	0.37%	+0.78%

Volatility

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Volatility Comparison

Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) has a higher volatility of 1.63% compared to GuidePath Flexible Income Allocation Fund (GPIFX) at 0.77%. This indicates that ACMDX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GPIFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACMDX	GPIFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.63%	0.77%	+0.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.69%	1.96%	+2.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.81%	2.41%	+4.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.61%	4.79%	+3.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.82%	5.32%	+3.50%

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACMDX has a 2.70% expense ratio, which is higher than GPIFX's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACMDX vs. GPIFX - Dividend Comparison

ACMDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.12%, less than GPIFX's 4.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACMDX Absolute Capital Defender Fund	3.12%	3.30%	3.54%	0.00%	0.00%	9.49%	0.00%	0.00%	6.87%	2.67%	0.67%	0.00%
GPIFX GuidePath Flexible Income Allocation Fund	4.56%	5.15%	5.18%	4.86%	1.96%	3.10%	2.62%	3.73%	3.46%	3.90%	1.97%	1.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACMDX and GPIFX in my portfolio?

ACMDX and GPIFX have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ACMDX or GPIFX?

ACMDX has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to GPIFX (0.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACMDX dropped -17.63% vs GPIFX's -16.72%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GPIFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 2.04), 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.