GBFFX vs. CHW

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

GBFFX (GMO Benchmark-Free Fund) and CHW (Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund) are both Global Allocation funds. Over the past 10 years, GBFFX returned 7.12%/yr vs 12.29%/yr for CHW. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GBFFX charges 0.35%/yr vs 2.63%/yr for CHW.

Performance

GBFFX vs. CHW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Benchmark-Free Fund (GBFFX) and Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBFFX achieves a 11.97% return, which is significantly lower than CHW's 20.64% return. Over the past 10 years, GBFFX has underperformed CHW with an annualized return of 7.12%, while CHW has yielded a comparatively higher 12.29% annualized return.

GBFFX

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 11.97%
• 6M: 14.15%
• 1Y: 29.31%
• 3Y*: 15.75%
• 5Y*: 8.03%
• 10Y*: 7.12%

CHW

• 1D: -3.43%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 20.64%
• 6M: 22.94%
• 1Y: 37.22%
• 3Y*: 24.68%
• 5Y*: 5.43%
• 10Y*: 12.29%

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

GBFFX vs. CHW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GBFFX GMO Benchmark-Free Fund	11.97%	24.07%	0.40%	15.24%	-3.36%	4.38%	-3.35%	13.79%	-7.12%	17.06%
CHW Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund	20.64%	19.55%	27.82%	14.55%	-37.74%	13.07%	22.28%	47.12%	-20.33%	43.78%

Correlation

The correlation between GBFFX and CHW 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	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2015	0.55

The correlation between GBFFX and CHW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GBFFX vs. CHW — Risk / Return Rank

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

GBFFX

GBFFX Risk / Return Rank: 96
GBFFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
GBFFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
GBFFX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
GBFFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
GBFFX Martin Ratio Rank: 93

CHW

CHW Risk / Return Rank: 53
CHW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
CHW Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CHW Omega Ratio Rank: 58
CHW Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
CHW Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

GBFFX vs. CHW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Benchmark-Free Fund (GBFFX) and Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW). 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.

	GBFFX	CHW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.17	2.29	+1.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.03	3.03	+2.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.84	1.41	+0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.15	2.41	+2.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.79	9.25	+10.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GBFFX vs. CHW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GBFFX Sharpe Ratio is 4.17, which is higher than the CHW Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBFFX and CHW, 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

	GBFFX	CHW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.17	2.29	+1.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00	0.28	+0.71
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79	0.55	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.28	+0.42

Drawdowns

GBFFX vs. CHW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBFFX drawdown since its inception was -26.62%, smaller than the maximum CHW drawdown of -66.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBFFX and CHW.

Drawdown Indicators

	GBFFX	CHW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.62%	-66.94%	+40.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.67%	-15.51%	+9.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.18%	-20.40%	+10.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.83%	-46.11%	+30.28%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-26.62%	-53.58%	+26.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-4.70%	+4.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.37%	-14.88%	+10.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.47%	4.03%	-2.56%

Volatility

GBFFX vs. CHW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GMO Benchmark-Free Fund (GBFFX) is 1.95%, while Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW) has a volatility of 7.17%. This indicates that GBFFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CHW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GBFFX	CHW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.95%	7.17%	-5.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.38%	14.09%	-8.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.99%	16.34%	-9.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.07%	19.17%	-11.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.08%	22.33%	-13.25%

GBFFX vs. CHW - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBFFX has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CHW's 2.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

GBFFX vs. CHW - Dividend Comparison

GBFFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.57%, less than CHW's 6.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CHW Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund	6.88%	8.10%	8.89%	10.40%	13.62%	8.43%	8.79%	9.67%	12.82%	9.25%	12.05%	11.73%
GBFFX GMO Benchmark-Free Fund	4.57%	5.11%	1.81%	5.72%	5.48%	4.60%	3.32%	4.00%	3.92%	2.90%	2.72%	6.67%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GBFFX and CHW in my portfolio?

GBFFX and CHW 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, GBFFX or CHW?

CHW has higher volatility (7.17%) compared to GBFFX (1.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBFFX dropped -26.62% vs CHW's -66.94%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GBFFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.17 vs 2.29), 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.