PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FMF vs. IGLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FMF vs. IGLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund (FMF) and FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMF achieves a 10.96% return, which is significantly higher than IGLD's 1.69% return.


FMF

1D
0.33%
1M
1.08%
YTD
10.96%
6M
11.47%
1Y
22.22%
3Y*
6.78%
5Y*
4.62%
10Y*
3.17%

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)

FMF vs. IGLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FMF
First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund
10.96%4.54%8.17%-0.18%5.24%-0.13%
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 FMF and IGLD is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.22

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.19

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2021

0.10

The correlation between FMF and IGLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (5 years) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

FMF vs. IGLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMF
FMF Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
FMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
FMF Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
FMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
FMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

IGLD
IGLD Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
IGLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGLD Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
IGLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGLD Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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.

FMF vs. IGLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund (FMF) 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.


FMFIGLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.22

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.52

1.40

+5.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.49

3.82

+14.66

FMF vs. IGLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is higher than the IGLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMF 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FMFIGLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.31

1.06

+1.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.43

0.86

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.17

0.94

-0.77

Drawdowns

FMF vs. IGLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMF drawdown since its inception was -22.21%, which is greater than IGLD's maximum drawdown of -18.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMF and IGLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FMFIGLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.21%

-18.59%

-3.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.42%

-17.56%

+14.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.25%

-17.56%

+10.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.98%

-18.59%

+3.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-16.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.07%

-15.16%

+15.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.86%

-5.24%

-4.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.20%

6.43%

-5.23%

Volatility

FMF vs. IGLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund (FMF) is 1.89%, while FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD) has a volatility of 5.12%. This indicates that FMF 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FMFIGLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.89%

5.12%

-3.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.11%

21.01%

-13.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.66%

23.24%

-13.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.74%

15.17%

-4.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.72%

15.00%

-3.28%

FMF vs. IGLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMF has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IGLD's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

FMF vs. IGLD - Dividend Comparison

FMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.96%, less than IGLD's 17.92% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FMF
First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund
4.96%5.60%4.85%3.09%0.41%3.29%0.02%1.05%1.56%0.82%
IGLD
FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF
17.92%9.91%20.81%7.85%4.45%2.24%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FMF and IGLD have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IGLD has higher volatility (5.12%) compared to FMF (1.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMF dropped -22.21% vs IGLD's -18.59%.

On 5-year performance, IGLD leads with 13.02% vs 4.62% for FMF. On fees, IGLD is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, FMF has been the lower-risk option at 1.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IGLD has performed better with a 13.02% return vs 4.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IGLD is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FMF.

IGLD has the higher dividend yield at 17.92%, compared with 4.96% for FMF.

FMF is categorized as Hedge Fund, while IGLD is Precious Metals. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FMF and 0.85% for IGLD.

FMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FMF and IGLD

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