ALLW vs. ASGM
ALLW (State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF) and ASGM (Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ALLW charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for ASGM.
Performance
ALLW vs. ASGM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ALLW achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly lower than ASGM's 16.91% return.
ALLW
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- -0.03%
- 6M
- 2.81%
- YTD
- 6.33%
- 1Y
- 17.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 15.64%
ASGM
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.87%
- 6M
- 11.04%
- YTD
- 16.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $11.63M | $11.75M | $17.60M | |
| $7.11K | $15.09K | $26.19K |
ALLW vs. ASGM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 6.33% | 9.36% |
ASGM Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF | 16.91% | 11.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between ALLW and ASGM is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2025 | 0.73 |
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
ALLW vs. ASGM — Risk / Return Rank
ALLW
ASGM
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ALLW vs. ASGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) and Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF (ASGM). 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.
| ALLW | ASGM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.38 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.05 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ALLW vs. ASGM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ALLW drawdown since its inception was -8.78%, which is greater than ASGM's maximum drawdown of -7.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ALLW and ASGM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ALLW | ASGM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.78% | -7.37% | -1.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.23% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.40% | -5.09% | +1.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.42% | -1.78% | +0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.13% | — | — |
Volatility
ALLW vs. ASGM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ALLW | ASGM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.84% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.90% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.15% | 16.72% | -5.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.44% | 16.72% | -4.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.44% | 16.72% | -4.28% |
ALLW vs. ASGM - Expense Ratio Comparison
ALLW has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than ASGM's 0.86% expense ratio.
Dividends
ALLW vs. ASGM - Dividend Comparison
ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.40%, more than ASGM's 3.86% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 4.40% | 4.67% |
ASGM Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF | 3.86% | 4.52% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ALLW and ASGM have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ALLW is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ALLW is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for ASGM.
ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.40%, compared with 3.86% for ASGM.
They also come from different issuers: State Street and Virtus. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for ALLW and 0.86% for ASGM.
Find the right allocation for ALLW and ASGM
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