GDEC vs. GMAR
GDEC (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - December) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds from FT Vest. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GDEC returned 14.42% vs 14.05% for GMAR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.
Performance
GDEC vs. GMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDEC achieves a 4.55% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 7.45% return.
GDEC
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- -0.01%
- YTD
- 4.55%
- 6M
- 4.31%
- 1Y
- 14.42%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GMAR
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- -0.06%
- YTD
- 7.45%
- 6M
- 7.48%
- 1Y
- 14.05%
- 3Y*
- 11.84%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GDEC vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GDEC FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - December | 4.55% | 12.14% | 11.45% | 0.50% |
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 7.45% | 9.29% | 12.14% | 0.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDEC and GMAR is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2023 | 0.82 |
The correlation between GDEC and GMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GDEC vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank
GDEC
GMAR
GDEC vs. GMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - December (GDEC) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| GDEC | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.49 | 1.90 | -0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.03 | 7.87 | -4.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.74 | 51.61 | -35.87 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDEC vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDEC drawdown since its inception was -10.61%, which is greater than GMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDEC and GMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDEC | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.61% | -9.11% | -1.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.79% | -1.79% | -3.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.11% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -0.61% | -0.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.76% | -0.54% | -0.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.92% | 0.27% | +0.65% |
Volatility
GDEC vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison
FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - December (GDEC) has a higher volatility of 1.87% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) at 1.42%. This indicates that GDEC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDEC | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.87% | 1.42% | +0.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.95% | 3.26% | +1.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.01% | 3.97% | +2.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.95% | 6.83% | +1.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.95% | 6.83% | +1.12% |
GDEC vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GDEC and GMAR have an expense ratio of 0.85%.
Dividends
GDEC vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither GDEC nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GDEC and GMAR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDEC has higher volatility (1.87%) compared to GMAR (1.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDEC dropped -10.61% vs GMAR's -9.11%.
On 1-year performance, GDEC leads with 14.42% vs 14.05% for GMAR. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. On volatility, GMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GDEC has performed better with a 14.42% return vs 14.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDEC and GMAR have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.
GDEC and GMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
GMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs 2.42), 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.
Find the right allocation for GDEC and GMAR
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