ADME vs. GDMA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ADME (Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF) and GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) are both Hedge Fund funds. ADME is passively managed, while GDMA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ADME returned 7.44%/yr vs 8.19%/yr for GDMA. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ADME charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for GDMA.

Performance

ADME vs. GDMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (ADME) and Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ADME achieves a 7.37% return, which is significantly lower than GDMA's 10.22% return.

ADME

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: -1.31%
• YTD: 7.37%
• 6M: 6.36%
• 1Y: 17.42%
• 3Y*: 16.12%
• 5Y*: 7.44%
• 10Y*: 8.73%

GDMA

• 1D: -3.51%
• 1M: 2.90%
• YTD: 10.22%
• 6M: 9.52%
• 1Y: 30.24%
• 3Y*: 16.68%
• 5Y*: 8.19%
• 10Y*: —

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

ADME vs. GDMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ADME Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF	7.37%	10.28%	22.11%	15.42%	-21.80%	20.24%	18.21%	9.31%	-8.78%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	10.22%	25.29%	7.44%	1.72%	-2.08%	3.95%	21.08%	11.59%	-3.70%

Correlation

The correlation between ADME and GDMA is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 2018	0.47

The correlation between ADME and GDMA shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (5 years) to 0.61 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ADME vs. GDMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ADME

ADME Risk / Return Rank: 51
ADME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
ADME Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
ADME Omega Ratio Rank: 48
ADME Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
ADME Martin Ratio Rank: 57

GDMA

GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 67
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

ADME vs. GDMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (ADME) and Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ADME	GDMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	2.00	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	2.56	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.39	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.34	4.03	-1.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.68	10.70	-1.02

ADME vs. GDMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ADME Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the GDMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ADME and GDMA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ADME vs. GDMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ADME drawdown since its inception was -27.49%, which is greater than GDMA's maximum drawdown of -16.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ADME and GDMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ADME	GDMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.49%	-16.66%	-10.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.49%	-7.53%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.67%	-7.53%	-8.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.43%	-12.74%	-10.69%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.49%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.93%	-3.51%	+0.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.89%	-3.78%	-4.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.80%	2.83%	-1.03%

Volatility

ADME vs. GDMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (ADME) is 4.57%, while Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a volatility of 8.71%. This indicates that ADME experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ADME	GDMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	8.71%	-4.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.63%	12.85%	-4.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.73%	15.24%	-4.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.00%	10.21%	+2.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.45%	11.32%	+3.13%

ADME vs. GDMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ADME has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than GDMA's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

ADME vs. GDMA - Dividend Comparison

ADME's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than GDMA's 2.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
ADME Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF	0.38%	0.38%	0.47%	0.78%	0.73%	0.26%	0.41%	0.70%	0.86%	0.32%	0.69%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	2.53%	2.79%	2.32%	4.14%	1.18%	2.10%	0.62%	3.17%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ADME and GDMA in my portfolio?

ADME and GDMA have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ADME or GDMA?

GDMA has higher volatility (8.71%) compared to ADME (4.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ADME dropped -27.49% vs GDMA's -16.66%.

Which ETF is better, ADME or GDMA?

On 5-year performance, GDMA leads with 8.19% vs 7.44% for ADME. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, ADME has been the lower-risk option at 4.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ADME or GDMA?

Over the 5-year period, GDMA has performed better with a 8.19% return vs 7.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ADME or GDMA?

GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for ADME.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ADME or GDMA?

GDMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.38% for ADME.

What is the main difference between ADME and GDMA?

They also come from different issuers: Aptus Capital Advisors and Gadsden. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ADME and 0.77% for GDMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.64), 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.