PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CRDT vs. GHMS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CRDT vs. GHMS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF (CRDT) and Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


CRDT

1D
1.01%
1M
2.46%
YTD
3.61%
6M
4.78%
1Y
3.19%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GHMS

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
0.00%
6M
0.00%
1Y
2.19%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CRDT vs. GHMS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
CRDT
Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF
3.61%-0.67%5.19%2.88%
GHMS
Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF
0.00%5.52%2.30%3.77%

Correlation

The correlation between CRDT and GHMS is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2023

0.01

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

CRDT vs. GHMS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRDT
CRDT Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
CRDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CRDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
CRDT Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
CRDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
CRDT Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

GHMS
GHMS Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
GHMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GHMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
GHMS Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
GHMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
GHMS Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CRDT vs. GHMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF (CRDT) and Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS). 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.


CRDTGHMSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.14

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.45

1.02

-0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.33

1.49

-0.16

CRDT vs. GHMS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRDT Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the GHMS Sharpe Ratio of 0.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRDT and GHMS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CRDTGHMSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.36

0.56

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.64

0.93

-0.29

Drawdowns

CRDT vs. GHMS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRDT drawdown since its inception was -9.80%, which is greater than GHMS's maximum drawdown of -4.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRDT and GHMS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CRDTGHMSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.80%

-4.73%

-5.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.18%

-2.73%

-4.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.67%

-2.44%

+0.77%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.31%

-1.21%

-1.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.40%

1.81%

+0.59%

Volatility

CRDT vs. GHMS - Volatility Comparison

Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF (CRDT) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) at 0.00%. This indicates that CRDT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GHMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CRDTGHMSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

0.00%

+3.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.70%

1.65%

+6.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.83%

4.97%

+3.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.07%

5.36%

+1.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.07%

5.36%

+1.71%

CRDT vs. GHMS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRDT has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GHMS's 1.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

CRDT vs. GHMS - Dividend Comparison

CRDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.23%, more than GHMS's 1.69% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
CRDT
Simplify Opportunistic Income ETF
6.23%7.04%7.29%2.59%
GHMS
Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF
1.69%1.69%4.48%0.29%

Frequently Asked Questions


CRDT and GHMS have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CRDT has higher volatility (3.86%) compared to GHMS (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRDT dropped -9.80% vs GHMS's -4.73%.

On 1-year performance, CRDT leads with 3.19% vs 2.19% for GHMS. On fees, CRDT is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GHMS has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CRDT has performed better with a 3.19% return vs 2.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CRDT is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.20% for GHMS.

CRDT has the higher dividend yield at 6.23%, compared with 1.69% for GHMS.

They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Goose Hollow. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CRDT and 1.20% for GHMS.

GHMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.56 vs 0.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CRDT and GHMS

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