ARB vs. GDMA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ARB (AltShares Merger Arbitrage ETF) and GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) are both Hedge Fund funds. ARB is passively managed, while GDMA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ARB returned 3.87%/yr vs 7.66%/yr for GDMA. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ARB charges 0.87%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for GDMA.

Performance

ARB vs. GDMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AltShares Merger Arbitrage ETF (ARB) 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, ARB achieves a 1.70% return, which is significantly lower than GDMA's 11.18% return.

ARB

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 1.70%
• 6M: 2.28%
• 1Y: 4.90%
• 3Y*: 6.40%
• 5Y*: 3.87%
• 10Y*: —

GDMA

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: 1.83%
• YTD: 11.18%
• 6M: 14.08%
• 1Y: 32.26%
• 3Y*: 16.91%
• 5Y*: 7.66%
• 10Y*: —

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

ARB vs. GDMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ARB AltShares Merger Arbitrage ETF	1.70%	6.05%	4.07%	3.85%	2.67%	3.16%	3.78%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	11.18%	25.29%	7.44%	1.72%	-2.08%	3.95%	27.17%

Correlation

The correlation between ARB and GDMA is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2020	0.13

The correlation between ARB and GDMA shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (5 years) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ARB vs. GDMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ARB	GDMA
Financial Services	21.4%	14.5%
Healthcare	17.4%	5.5%
Technology	16.3%	23.4%
Industrials	11.9%	14.4%
Communication Services	9.9%	7.0%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	3.5%
Consumer Cyclical	5.6%	8.8%
Basic Materials	5.3%	9.0%
Utilities	3.1%	2.4%
Real Estate	3.1%	1.6%
Energy	0.6%	10.0%

Return for Risk

ARB vs. GDMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ARB

ARB Risk / Return Rank: 69
ARB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
ARB Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ARB Omega Ratio Rank: 56
ARB Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ARB Martin Ratio Rank: 90

GDMA

GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 74
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

ARB vs. GDMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AltShares Merger Arbitrage ETF (ARB) 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.

	ARB	GDMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.47	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	3.21	-0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.47	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.17	4.30	+2.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.90	11.92	+8.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ARB vs. GDMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ARB Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the GDMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ARB 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ARB	GDMA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.70	2.47	-0.77
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88	0.80	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.95	0.89	+0.06

Drawdowns

ARB vs. GDMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ARB drawdown since its inception was -5.60%, smaller than the maximum GDMA drawdown of -16.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARB and GDMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ARB	GDMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.60%	-16.66%	+11.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.69%	-7.53%	+6.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-2.13%	-7.53%	+5.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-5.60%	-12.74%	+7.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-1.06%	+0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.94%	-3.78%	+2.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.24%	2.71%	-2.47%

Volatility

ARB vs. GDMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AltShares Merger Arbitrage ETF (ARB) is 1.28%, while Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a volatility of 6.18%. This indicates that ARB 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

	ARB	GDMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.28%	6.18%	-4.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.38%	10.03%	-7.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.89%	13.12%	-10.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.40%	9.67%	-5.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.40%	10.97%	-6.57%

ARB vs. GDMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ARB has a 0.87% expense ratio, which is higher than GDMA's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

ARB vs. GDMA - Dividend Comparison

ARB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, less than GDMA's 2.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ARB AltShares Merger Arbitrage ETF	0.43%	0.43%	1.12%	0.00%	4.18%	0.00%	2.87%	0.00%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	2.51%	2.79%	2.32%	4.14%	1.18%	2.10%	0.62%	3.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ARB and GDMA in my portfolio?

ARB and GDMA have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ARB or GDMA?

GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to ARB (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ARB dropped -5.60% vs GDMA's -16.66%.

Which ETF is better, ARB or GDMA?

On 5-year performance, GDMA leads with 7.66% vs 3.87% for ARB. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, ARB has been the lower-risk option at 1.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ARB or GDMA?

Over the 5-year period, GDMA has performed better with a 7.66% return vs 3.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ARB or GDMA?

GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for ARB.

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

GDMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 0.43% for ARB.

What is the main difference between ARB and GDMA?

They also come from different issuers: Water Island Capital Partners LP and Gadsden. Their fees differ too: 0.87% for ARB and 0.77% for GDMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.70), 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.