ELM vs. GMMA

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ELM (Elm Market Navigator ETF) and GMMA (GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. ELM is actively managed, while GMMA is passively managed. Over the past year, ELM returned 20.07% vs 9.99% for GMMA. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ELM charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GMMA.

Performance

ELM vs. GMMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) 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, ELM achieves a 7.82% return, which is significantly higher than GMMA's 2.92% return.

ELM

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 1.28%
• YTD: 7.82%
• 6M: 8.21%
• 1Y: 20.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMMA

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 2.92%
• 6M: 2.80%
• 1Y: 9.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ELM vs. GMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF	7.82%	11.88%
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	2.92%	5.16%

Correlation

The correlation between ELM and GMMA is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2025	0.67

The correlation between ELM and GMMA shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (all time) to 0.78 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ELM vs. GMMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ELM

ELM Risk / Return Rank: 64
ELM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
ELM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
ELM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
ELM Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
ELM Martin Ratio Rank: 63

GMMA

GMMA Risk / Return Rank: 54
GMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
GMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
GMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 54
GMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
GMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

ELM vs. GMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) 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.

	ELM	GMMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	1.68	+0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	2.34	+0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.33	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.68	2.96	-0.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.95	9.73	+1.22

ELM vs. GMMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ELM Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the GMMA Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ELM 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

ELM vs. GMMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ELM drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, which is greater than GMMA's maximum drawdown of -5.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ELM and GMMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ELM	GMMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.02%	-5.21%	-3.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.52%	-3.39%	-4.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-1.07%	+0.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.32%	-1.24%	-0.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.84%	1.03%	+0.81%

Volatility

ELM vs. GMMA - Volatility Comparison

Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) has a higher volatility of 3.36% compared to GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) at 2.99%. This indicates that ELM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ELM	GMMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.36%	2.99%	+0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.98%	4.87%	+3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.69%	5.99%	+3.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.40%	7.32%	+3.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.40%	7.32%	+3.08%

ELM vs. GMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ELM has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than GMMA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ELM vs. GMMA - Dividend Comparison

ELM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, less than GMMA's 3.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF	2.52%	2.71%	0.00%
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.67%	3.00%	0.57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ELM and GMMA in my portfolio?

ELM and GMMA have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ELM or GMMA?

ELM has higher volatility (3.36%) compared to GMMA (2.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ELM dropped -9.02% vs GMMA's -5.21%.

Which ETF is better, ELM or GMMA?

On 1-year performance, ELM leads with 20.07% vs 9.99% for GMMA. On fees, ELM is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, GMMA has been the lower-risk option at 2.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ELM or GMMA?

Over the 1-year period, ELM has performed better with a 20.07% return vs 9.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ELM or GMMA?

ELM is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GMMA.

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

GMMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 2.52% for ELM.

What is the main difference between ELM and GMMA?

They also come from different issuers: Elm and GammaRoad Capital Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for ELM and 0.75% for GMMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ELM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.68), 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.