BSR vs. GGM

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

BSR (Beacon Selective Risk ETF) and GGM (GGM Macro Alignment ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. BSR is passively managed, while GGM is actively managed. Over the past year, BSR returned 7.86% vs 17.62% for GGM. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BSR charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.94%/yr for GGM.

Performance

BSR vs. GGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) and GGM Macro Alignment ETF (GGM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSR achieves a 2.28% return, which is significantly lower than GGM's 12.69% return.

BSR

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: -0.59%
• 6M: -1.03%
• YTD: 2.28%
• 1Y: 7.86%
• 3Y*: 5.83%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.14%

GGM

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 0.97%
• 6M: 9.61%
• YTD: 12.69%
• 1Y: 17.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.94%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	$62.80K	$47.57K	$82.93K
GGM GGM Macro Alignment ETF	$610.56	$1.82K	$2.00K

BSR vs. GGM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	2.28%	4.21%	12.44%	3.92%
GGM GGM Macro Alignment ETF	12.69%	1.24%	4.46%	7.04%

Correlation

The correlation between BSR and GGM is 0.76, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2023	0.76

The correlation between BSR and GGM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

BSR vs. GGM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BSR	GGM
Utilities	12.4%	19.0%
Healthcare	12.1%	0.3%
Technology	11.6%	20.2%
Energy	11.4%	20.9%
Industrials	11.3%	19.9%
Consumer Defensive	11.1%	5.5%
Real Estate	10.9%	-
Basic Materials	10.1%	17.9%
Communication Services	7.8%	6.0%
Consumer Cyclical	1.2%	28.4%
Financial Services	0.1%	19.7%

Return for Risk

BSR vs. GGM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BSR

BSR Risk / Return Rank: 31
BSR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
BSR Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
BSR Omega Ratio Rank: 30
BSR Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
BSR Martin Ratio Rank: 31

GGM

GGM Risk / Return Rank: 63
GGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
GGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
GGM Omega Ratio Rank: 61
GGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
GGM Martin Ratio Rank: 60

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BSR vs. GGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) and GGM Macro Alignment ETF (GGM). 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.

	BSR	GGM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.79	1.49	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.13	2.12	-0.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.27	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	2.37	-1.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.78	7.33	-4.54

BSR vs. GGM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSR Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is lower than the GGM Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSR and GGM, 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

BSR vs. GGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSR drawdown since its inception was -15.68%, smaller than the maximum GGM drawdown of -19.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSR and GGM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSR	GGM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.68%	-19.68%	+4.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.15%	-7.54%	+1.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.45%	-0.07%	-5.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.60%	-5.01%	+0.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	2.43%	+0.13%

Volatility

BSR vs. GGM - Volatility Comparison

Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) has a higher volatility of 2.97% compared to GGM Macro Alignment ETF (GGM) at 2.49%. This indicates that BSR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSR	GGM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.97%	2.49%	+0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.64%	9.29%	-2.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.08%	11.97%	-2.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.99%	13.19%	+2.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.99%	13.19%	+2.80%

BSR vs. GGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSR has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than GGM's 0.94% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSR vs. GGM - Dividend Comparison

BSR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.83%, more than GGM's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	2.83%	2.89%	0.89%	1.08%
GGM GGM Macro Alignment ETF	1.39%	1.57%	1.39%	0.50%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSR and GGM in my portfolio?

BSR and GGM have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BSR or GGM?

BSR has higher volatility (2.97%) compared to GGM (2.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSR dropped -15.68% vs GGM's -19.68%.

Which ETF is better, BSR or GGM?

On 1-year performance, GGM leads with 17.62% vs 7.86% for BSR. On fees, GGM is cheaper at 0.94% per year. On volatility, GGM has been the lower-risk option at 2.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSR or GGM?

Over the 1-year period, GGM has performed better with a 17.62% return vs 7.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSR or GGM?

GGM is cheaper with a 0.94% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BSR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSR or GGM?

BSR has the higher dividend yield at 2.83%, compared with 1.39% for GGM.

What is the main difference between BSR and GGM?

They also come from different issuers: American Beacon and Waverly. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BSR and 0.94% for GGM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.79), 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.