AEMS vs. GOOP
AEMS (Anfield Enhanced Market ETF) and GOOP (Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Google ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Over the past year, AEMS returned 27.65% vs 75.67% for GOOP. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AEMS charges 1.21%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for GOOP.
Performance
AEMS vs. GOOP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AEMS achieves a 14.93% return, which is significantly higher than GOOP's 10.04% return.
AEMS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 11.37%
- YTD
- 14.93%
- 1Y
- 27.65%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GOOP
- 1D
- -1.36%
- 1M
- -2.33%
- 6M
- 5.26%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 1Y
- 75.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AEMS vs. GOOP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AEMS Anfield Enhanced Market ETF | 14.93% | 11.86% |
GOOP Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Google ETF | 10.04% | 63.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between AEMS and GOOP is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025 | 0.47 |
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
AEMS vs. GOOP — Risk / Return Rank
AEMS
GOOP
AEMS vs. GOOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield Enhanced Market ETF (AEMS) and Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Google ETF (GOOP). 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.
| AEMS | GOOP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.45 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.44 | 3.26 | -0.82 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.69 | 10.54 | -0.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AEMS vs. GOOP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AEMS drawdown since its inception was -11.37%, smaller than the maximum GOOP drawdown of -27.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AEMS and GOOP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AEMS | GOOP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.37% | -27.49% | +16.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.37% | -23.32% | +11.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.91% | -13.73% | +4.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.66% | -6.50% | +4.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.86% | 7.20% | -4.34% |
Volatility
AEMS vs. GOOP - Volatility Comparison
Anfield Enhanced Market ETF (AEMS) has a higher volatility of 12.79% compared to Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Google ETF (GOOP) at 9.78%. This indicates that AEMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GOOP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AEMS | GOOP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.79% | 9.78% | +3.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.93% | 24.21% | -6.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.40% | 29.42% | -9.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.12% | 26.25% | -6.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.12% | 26.25% | -6.13% |
AEMS vs. GOOP - Expense Ratio Comparison
AEMS has a 1.21% expense ratio, which is higher than GOOP's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
AEMS vs. GOOP - Dividend Comparison
AEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 447.11%, more than GOOP's 12.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
AEMS Anfield Enhanced Market ETF | 447.11% | 7.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GOOP Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Google ETF | 12.89% | 11.79% | 13.73% | 2.06% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AEMS and GOOP have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AEMS has higher volatility (12.79%) compared to GOOP (9.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AEMS dropped -11.37% vs GOOP's -27.49%.
On 1-year performance, GOOP leads with 75.67% vs 27.65% for AEMS. On fees, GOOP is cheaper at 0.99% per year. On volatility, GOOP has been the lower-risk option at 9.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GOOP has performed better with a 75.67% return vs 27.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GOOP is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.21% for AEMS.
AEMS has the higher dividend yield at 447.11%, compared with 12.89% for GOOP.
They also come from different issuers: Anfield and Kurv. Their fees differ too: 1.21% for AEMS and 0.99% for GOOP.
GOOP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.36), 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 AEMS and GOOP
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