CAOS vs. HFGM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) and HFGM (Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while HFGM is a Macro Trading fund actively managed by Unlimited. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CAOS returned 1.79% vs 31.50% for HFGM. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. CAOS charges 0.63%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for HFGM.

Performance

CAOS vs. HFGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) and Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAOS achieves a 0.74% return, which is significantly lower than HFGM's 10.94% return.

CAOS

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.13%
• YTD: 0.74%
• 6M: 0.65%
• 1Y: 1.79%
• 3Y*: 4.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HFGM

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: -7.19%
• YTD: 10.94%
• 6M: 10.72%
• 1Y: 31.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CAOS vs. HFGM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.74%	0.73%
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF	10.94%	26.88%

Correlation

The correlation between CAOS and HFGM is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2025	-0.16

Return for Risk

CAOS vs. HFGM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 43
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 42
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 41

HFGM

HFGM Risk / Return Rank: 49
HFGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
HFGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
HFGM Omega Ratio Rank: 44
HFGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
HFGM Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

CAOS vs. HFGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) and Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM). 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.

	CAOS	HFGM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	1.38	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	1.91	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.25	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.37	2.88	-0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.80	7.47	-1.67

CAOS vs. HFGM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAOS Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the HFGM Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAOS and HFGM, 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

CAOS vs. HFGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAOS drawdown since its inception was -3.89%, smaller than the maximum HFGM drawdown of -10.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAOS and HFGM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAOS	HFGM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.89%	-10.97%	+7.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.76%	-10.97%	+10.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.60%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.15%	-8.59%	+7.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-2.82%	+1.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.31%	4.24%	-3.93%

Volatility

CAOS vs. HFGM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) is 0.32%, while Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) has a volatility of 5.17%. This indicates that CAOS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HFGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CAOS	HFGM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	5.17%	-4.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.04%	17.78%	-16.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.53%	22.89%	-21.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.25%	21.78%	-17.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.25%	21.78%	-17.53%

CAOS vs. HFGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAOS has a 0.63% expense ratio, which is lower than HFGM's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAOS vs. HFGM - Dividend Comparison

CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HFGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.13%.

Position	TTM	2025
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF	10.13%	11.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAOS and HFGM in my portfolio?

CAOS and HFGM have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CAOS or HFGM?

HFGM has higher volatility (5.17%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAOS dropped -3.89% vs HFGM's -10.97%.

Which ETF is better, CAOS or HFGM?

On 1-year performance, HFGM leads with 31.50% vs 1.79% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAOS or HFGM?

Over the 1-year period, HFGM has performed better with a 31.50% return vs 1.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAOS or HFGM?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for HFGM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAOS or HFGM?

HFGM has the higher dividend yield at 10.13%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between CAOS and HFGM?

CAOS is categorized as Options Trading, while HFGM is Macro Trading. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Unlimited. Their fees differ too: 0.63% for CAOS and 0.95% for HFGM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HFGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.18), 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.