FVC vs. GDMA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FVC (First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF) and GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) are both Hedge Fund funds. FVC is passively managed, while GDMA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FVC returned 4.98%/yr vs 7.66%/yr for GDMA. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FVC charges 0.71%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for GDMA.

Performance

FVC vs. GDMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) and Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FVC achieves a 17.30% return, which is significantly higher than GDMA's 11.18% return.

FVC

• 1D: 1.40%
• 1M: 11.30%
• YTD: 17.30%
• 6M: 17.97%
• 1Y: 23.41%
• 3Y*: 10.91%
• 5Y*: 4.98%
• 10Y*: 8.62%

GDMA

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: 1.83%
• YTD: 11.18%
• 6M: 14.08%
• 1Y: 32.26%
• 3Y*: 16.91%
• 5Y*: 7.66%
• 10Y*: —

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

FVC vs. GDMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF	17.30%	2.12%	12.43%	-4.59%	-6.03%	21.92%	12.71%	19.28%	-7.34%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	11.18%	25.29%	7.44%	1.72%	-2.08%	3.95%	21.08%	11.59%	-3.93%

Correlation

The correlation between FVC and GDMA is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018	0.50

The correlation between FVC and GDMA shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (5 years) to 0.54 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FVC vs. GDMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FVC	GDMA
Technology	29.0%	23.4%
Industrials	27.8%	14.4%
Financial Services	19.8%	14.5%
Healthcare	19.4%	5.5%
Energy	17.5%	10.0%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	8.8%
Communication Services	6.3%	7.0%
Real Estate	0.7%	1.6%
Basic Materials	-	9.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.5%
Utilities	-	2.4%

Return for Risk

FVC vs. GDMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FVC

FVC Risk / Return Rank: 49
FVC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
FVC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
FVC Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FVC Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FVC Martin Ratio Rank: 43

GDMA

GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 74
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

FVC vs. GDMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) and Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA). 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.

	FVC	GDMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.47	-0.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	3.21	-0.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.47	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.77	4.30	-2.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.94	11.92	-4.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FVC vs. GDMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FVC Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the GDMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FVC and GDMA, 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

	FVC	GDMA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	2.47	-0.65
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	0.80	-0.49
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.89	-0.39

Drawdowns

FVC vs. GDMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FVC drawdown since its inception was -30.96%, which is greater than GDMA's maximum drawdown of -16.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FVC and GDMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FVC	GDMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.96%	-16.66%	-14.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.32%	-7.53%	-5.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.75%	-7.53%	-7.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.62%	-12.74%	-9.88%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.06%	+1.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.06%	-3.78%	-3.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.38%	2.71%	+0.67%

Volatility

FVC vs. GDMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) is 4.29%, while Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a volatility of 6.18%. This indicates that FVC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FVC	GDMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.29%	6.18%	-1.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.37%	10.03%	+2.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.94%	13.12%	-0.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.30%	9.67%	+6.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.61%	10.97%	+6.64%

FVC vs. GDMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FVC has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is lower than GDMA's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

FVC vs. GDMA - Dividend Comparison

FVC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than GDMA's 2.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF	1.92%	2.57%	0.78%	1.89%	1.50%	0.09%	0.21%	1.07%	0.24%	0.63%	0.67%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	2.51%	2.79%	2.32%	4.14%	1.18%	2.10%	0.62%	3.17%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FVC and GDMA in my portfolio?

FVC and GDMA have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FVC or GDMA?

GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to FVC (4.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FVC dropped -30.96% vs GDMA's -16.66%.

Which ETF is better, FVC or GDMA?

On 5-year performance, GDMA leads with 7.66% vs 4.98% for FVC. On fees, FVC is cheaper at 0.71% per year. On volatility, FVC has been the lower-risk option at 4.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FVC or GDMA?

Over the 5-year period, GDMA has performed better with a 7.66% return vs 4.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FVC or GDMA?

FVC is cheaper with a 0.71% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for GDMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FVC or GDMA?

GDMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 1.92% for FVC.

What is the main difference between FVC and GDMA?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Gadsden. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for FVC and 0.77% for GDMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.82), 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.