GAL vs. MFUL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GAL (SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF) and MFUL (Mindful Conservative ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GAL returned 14.04%/yr vs 4.96%/yr for MFUL. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GAL charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for MFUL.

Performance

GAL vs. MFUL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF (GAL) and Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GAL achieves a 8.72% return, which is significantly higher than MFUL's 3.28% return.

GAL

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: 2.59%
• YTD: 8.72%
• 6M: 9.29%
• 1Y: 20.19%
• 3Y*: 14.04%
• 5Y*: 6.96%
• 10Y*: 8.23%

MFUL

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 1.45%
• YTD: 3.28%
• 6M: 3.33%
• 1Y: 7.13%
• 3Y*: 4.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GAL vs. MFUL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GAL SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF	8.72%	15.95%	9.85%	13.32%	-13.41%	-0.23%
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.28%	4.51%	5.36%	2.24%	-12.46%	-1.61%

Correlation

The correlation between GAL and MFUL is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2021	0.70

Over the past year, GAL and MFUL have become more correlated (0.91) than their long-term average of 0.70, meaning their price movements have been converging.

GAL vs. MFUL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GAL	MFUL
Technology	27.2%	25.8%
Financial Services	15.8%	10.7%
Industrials	12.2%	9.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	8.7%
Healthcare	7.8%	8.4%
Communication Services	7.7%	8.4%
Basic Materials	5.0%	5.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	6.7%
Energy	4.3%	8.0%
Real Estate	2.7%	2.4%
Utilities	2.6%	5.5%

Return for Risk

GAL vs. MFUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

GAL

GAL Risk / Return Rank: 70
GAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
GAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
GAL Omega Ratio Rank: 71
GAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
GAL Martin Ratio Rank: 73

MFUL

MFUL Risk / Return Rank: 52
MFUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
MFUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
MFUL Omega Ratio Rank: 58
MFUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
MFUL Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

GAL vs. MFUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF (GAL) and Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL). 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.

	GAL	MFUL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	1.82	+0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	2.59	+0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.35	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.24	2.13	+1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.83	8.24	+5.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GAL vs. MFUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is comparable to the MFUL Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GAL and MFUL, 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

	GAL	MFUL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.32	1.82	+0.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.73	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	0.01	+0.69

Drawdowns

GAL vs. MFUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GAL drawdown since its inception was -28.31%, which is greater than MFUL's maximum drawdown of -16.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GAL and MFUL.

Drawdown Indicators

	GAL	MFUL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.31%	-16.41%	-11.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.27%	-3.36%	-2.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.12%	-4.74%	-4.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.14%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.57%	-0.46%	-0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.74%	-9.50%	+5.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.46%	0.87%	+0.59%

Volatility

GAL vs. MFUL - Volatility Comparison

SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF (GAL) has a higher volatility of 2.66% compared to Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) at 1.46%. This indicates that GAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MFUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GAL	MFUL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.66%	1.46%	+1.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.01%	3.23%	+3.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.73%	3.93%	+4.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.43%	4.24%	+6.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.37%	4.24%	+7.13%

GAL vs. MFUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

GAL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than MFUL's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

GAL vs. MFUL - Dividend Comparison

GAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, more than MFUL's 3.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GAL SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF	3.13%	3.47%	2.99%	2.56%	6.19%	4.05%	2.14%	2.96%	2.43%	2.26%	2.43%	3.10%
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.01%	3.31%	2.59%	5.00%	0.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GAL and MFUL in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, GAL and MFUL move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GAL or MFUL?

GAL has higher volatility (2.66%) compared to MFUL (1.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GAL dropped -28.31% vs MFUL's -16.41%.

Which ETF is better, GAL or MFUL?

On 3-year performance, GAL leads with 14.04% vs 4.96% for MFUL. On fees, GAL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, MFUL has been the lower-risk option at 1.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GAL or MFUL?

Over the 3-year period, GAL has performed better with a 14.04% return vs 4.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GAL or MFUL?

GAL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for MFUL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GAL or MFUL?

GAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.13%, compared with 3.01% for MFUL.

What is the main difference between GAL and MFUL?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GAL and 1.10% for MFUL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 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.