FMAY vs. IGLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FMAY (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May) and IGLD (FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMAY is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index May Series, while IGLD is a Precious Metals fund actively managed by First Trust. FMAY is passively managed, while IGLD is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FMAY returned 9.48%/yr vs 13.02%/yr for IGLD. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.

Performance

FMAY vs. IGLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May (FMAY) and FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMAY achieves a 5.39% return, which is significantly higher than IGLD's 1.69% return.

FMAY

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 1.63%
• YTD: 5.39%
• 6M: 6.32%
• 1Y: 15.38%
• 3Y*: 14.13%
• 5Y*: 9.48%
• 10Y*: —

IGLD

• 1D: -0.81%
• 1M: -1.33%
• YTD: 1.69%
• 6M: 4.44%
• 1Y: 24.53%
• 3Y*: 23.01%
• 5Y*: 13.02%
• 10Y*: —

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

FMAY vs. IGLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May	5.39%	12.69%	14.45%	17.83%	-8.08%	9.71%
IGLD FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF	1.69%	47.46%	19.36%	9.24%	-2.34%	4.30%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAY and IGLD is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.12
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2021	0.10

Return for Risk

FMAY vs. IGLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMAY

FMAY Risk / Return Rank: 83
FMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
FMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
FMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 91

IGLD

IGLD Risk / Return Rank: 28
IGLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
IGLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
IGLD Omega Ratio Rank: 32
IGLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
IGLD Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

FMAY vs. IGLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May (FMAY) and FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD). 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.

	FMAY	IGLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	1.06	+1.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.80	1.47	+2.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.22	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.66	1.40	+2.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.48	3.82	+17.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FMAY vs. IGLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAY Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is higher than the IGLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAY and IGLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FMAY	IGLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.56	1.06	+1.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90	0.86	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.02	0.94	+0.08

Drawdowns

FMAY vs. IGLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAY drawdown since its inception was -13.60%, smaller than the maximum IGLD drawdown of -18.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAY and IGLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMAY	IGLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.60%	-18.59%	+4.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.22%	-17.56%	+13.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.12%	-17.56%	+4.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.60%	-18.59%	+4.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.38%	-15.16%	+14.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.01%	-5.24%	+3.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.72%	6.43%	-5.71%

Volatility

FMAY vs. IGLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May (FMAY) is 1.02%, while FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD) has a volatility of 5.12%. This indicates that FMAY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMAY	IGLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.02%	5.12%	-4.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.59%	21.01%	-16.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.04%	23.24%	-17.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.59%	15.17%	-4.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.15%	15.00%	-4.85%

FMAY vs. IGLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FMAY and IGLD have an expense ratio of 0.85%.

Dividends

FMAY vs. IGLD - Dividend Comparison

FMAY has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IGLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 17.92%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IGLD FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF	17.92%	9.91%	20.81%	7.85%	4.45%	2.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMAY and IGLD in my portfolio?

FMAY and IGLD have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMAY or IGLD?

IGLD has higher volatility (5.12%) compared to FMAY (1.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAY dropped -13.60% vs IGLD's -18.59%.

Which ETF is better, FMAY or IGLD?

On 5-year performance, IGLD leads with 13.02% vs 9.48% for FMAY. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. On volatility, FMAY has been the lower-risk option at 1.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMAY or IGLD?

Over the 5-year period, IGLD has performed better with a 13.02% return vs 9.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMAY or IGLD?

FMAY and IGLD have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMAY or IGLD?

IGLD has the higher dividend yield at 17.92%, compared with 0.00% for FMAY.

What is the main difference between FMAY and IGLD?

FMAY is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while IGLD is Precious Metals.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 1.06), 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.