BSR vs. GMMA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BSR (Beacon Selective Risk ETF) and GMMA (GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds - BSR tracks the NONE while GMMA tracks the MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BSR returned 10.43% vs 8.28% for GMMA. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BSR charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GMMA.

Performance

BSR vs. GMMA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSR achieves a 2.77% return, which is significantly higher than GMMA's 1.98% return.

BSR

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: -0.29%
• YTD: 2.77%
• 6M: 2.04%
• 1Y: 10.43%
• 3Y*: 7.09%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMMA

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: -0.80%
• YTD: 1.98%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 8.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BSR vs. GMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	2.77%	4.21%	-0.08%
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	1.98%	8.95%	0.22%

Correlation

The correlation between BSR and GMMA is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024	0.68

The correlation between BSR and GMMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BSR vs. GMMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSR

BSR Risk / Return Rank: 35
BSR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
BSR Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
BSR Omega Ratio Rank: 34
BSR Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
BSR Martin Ratio Rank: 33

GMMA

GMMA Risk / Return Rank: 47
GMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
GMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
GMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 46
GMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
GMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

BSR vs. GMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) and GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA). 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	GMMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	1.38	-0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.67	1.92	-0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.27	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	2.45	-0.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.57	8.01	-3.44

BSR vs. GMMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSR Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is comparable to the GMMA Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSR and GMMA, 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. GMMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSR drawdown since its inception was -15.68%, which is greater than GMMA's maximum drawdown of -5.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSR and GMMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSR	GMMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.68%	-5.21%	-10.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.15%	-3.39%	-2.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.99%	-1.98%	-3.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.58%	-1.24%	-3.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.29%	1.04%	+1.25%

Volatility

BSR vs. GMMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) is 2.41%, while GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) has a volatility of 3.12%. This indicates that BSR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GMMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSR	GMMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.41%	3.12%	-0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.52%	4.92%	+1.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.79%	6.05%	+2.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.17%	7.34%	+8.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.17%	7.34%	+8.83%

BSR vs. GMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSR has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than GMMA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSR vs. GMMA - Dividend Comparison

BSR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%, less than GMMA's 3.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	2.82%	2.89%	0.89%	1.08%
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.70%	3.00%	0.57%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSR and GMMA in my portfolio?

BSR and GMMA have a correlation of 0.70, 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 GMMA?

GMMA has higher volatility (3.12%) compared to BSR (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSR dropped -15.68% vs GMMA's -5.21%.

Which ETF is better, BSR or GMMA?

On 1-year performance, BSR leads with 10.43% vs 8.28% for GMMA. On fees, GMMA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BSR has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSR or GMMA?

Over the 1-year period, BSR has performed better with a 10.43% return vs 8.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSR or GMMA?

GMMA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BSR.

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

GMMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.70%, compared with 2.82% for BSR.

What is the main difference between BSR and GMMA?

BSR tracks NONE, while GMMA tracks MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy Index. They also come from different issuers: American Beacon and GammaRoad Capital Partners. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BSR and 0.75% for GMMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.19), 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.