GDMA vs. FMF
GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and FMF (First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund) are both Hedge Fund funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDMA returned 7.66%/yr vs 4.62%/yr for FMF. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FMF.
Performance
GDMA vs. FMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with GDMA having a 11.18% return and FMF slightly lower at 10.96%.
GDMA
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 1.83%
- YTD
- 11.18%
- 6M
- 14.08%
- 1Y
- 32.26%
- 3Y*
- 16.91%
- 5Y*
- 7.66%
- 10Y*
- —
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%
GDMA vs. FMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF | 11.18% | 25.29% | 7.44% | 1.72% | -2.08% | 3.95% | 21.08% | 11.59% | -3.93% |
FMF First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund | 10.96% | 4.54% | 8.17% | -0.18% | 5.24% | 3.57% | 5.69% | -5.16% | -2.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDMA and FMF is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018 | 0.32 |
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
GDMA vs. FMF — Risk / Return Rank
GDMA
FMF
GDMA vs. FMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund (FMF). 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.
| GDMA | FMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.42 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.30 | 6.52 | -2.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.92 | 18.49 | -6.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GDMA | FMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.47 | 2.31 | +0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 | 0.43 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.27 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.89 | 0.17 | +0.72 |
Drawdowns
GDMA vs. FMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum FMF drawdown of -22.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and FMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDMA | FMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.66% | -22.21% | +5.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -3.42% | -4.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.53% | -7.25% | -0.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.74% | -14.98% | +2.24% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -16.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.06% | -0.07% | -0.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -9.86% | +6.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.71% | 1.20% | +1.51% |
Volatility
GDMA vs. FMF - Volatility Comparison
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 6.18% compared to First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund (FMF) at 1.89%. This indicates that GDMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDMA | FMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.18% | 1.89% | +4.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.03% | 7.11% | +2.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.12% | 9.66% | +3.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.67% | 10.74% | -1.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.97% | 11.72% | -0.75% |
GDMA vs. FMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than FMF's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDMA vs. FMF - Dividend Comparison
GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, less than FMF's 4.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
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% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDMA and FMF have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to FMF (1.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs FMF's -22.21%.
On 5-year performance, GDMA leads with 7.66% vs 4.62% for FMF. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% 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, GDMA has performed better with a 7.66% return vs 4.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FMF.
FMF has the higher dividend yield at 4.96%, compared with 2.51% for GDMA.
They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 0.95% for FMF.
GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.31), 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 GDMA and FMF
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