GDMA vs. FTLS
GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and FTLS (First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDMA is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by Gadsden, while FTLS is a Long-Short fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDMA returned 8.45%/yr vs 10.06%/yr for FTLS. Their 0.45 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 1.38%/yr for FTLS.
Performance
GDMA vs. FTLS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDMA achieves a 10.56% return, which is significantly higher than FTLS's 6.03% return.
GDMA
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- 6M
- 1.94%
- YTD
- 10.56%
- 1Y
- 23.37%
- 3Y*
- 16.04%
- 5Y*
- 8.45%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.45%
FTLS
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- 1.85%
- 6M
- 4.95%
- YTD
- 6.03%
- 1Y
- 13.39%
- 3Y*
- 13.13%
- 5Y*
- 10.06%
- 10Y*
- 9.59%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.00%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $8.26M | $8.04M | $8.94M | |
| $1.65M | $1.00M | $708.66K |
GDMA vs. FTLS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF | 10.56% | 25.29% | 7.44% | 1.72% | -2.08% | 3.95% | 21.08% | 11.59% | -3.70% |
FTLS First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF | 6.03% | 9.09% | 18.80% | 16.94% | -5.56% | 19.65% | 2.56% | 16.16% | -3.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDMA and FTLS is 0.43, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 2018 | 0.45 |
The correlation between GDMA and FTLS shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (5 years) to 0.48 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. FTLS — Risk / Return Rank
GDMA
FTLS
GDMA vs. FTLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF (FTLS). 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.
| GDMA | FTLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.28 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.12 | 3.55 | -0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.24 | 10.80 | -3.56 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDMA vs. FTLS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum FTLS drawdown of -20.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and FTLS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDMA | FTLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.66% | -20.54% | +3.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -3.79% | -3.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.53% | -11.69% | +4.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.74% | -11.69% | -1.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -20.54% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.21% | -0.42% | -2.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.79% | -2.67% | -1.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.24% | 1.24% | +2.00% |
Volatility
GDMA vs. FTLS - Volatility Comparison
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 3.27% compared to First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF (FTLS) at 2.15%. This indicates that GDMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDMA | FTLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.27% | 2.15% | +1.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.20% | 5.86% | +7.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.80% | 8.54% | +7.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.24% | 10.53% | -0.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.39% | 11.23% | +0.16% |
GDMA vs. FTLS - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than FTLS's 1.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDMA vs. FTLS - Dividend Comparison
GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, more than FTLS's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTLS First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF | 0.88% | 1.07% | 1.50% | 1.49% | 0.81% | 0.01% | 0.44% | 0.83% | 0.87% | 0.43% | 1.04% | 0.49% |
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF | 2.53% | 2.79% | 2.32% | 4.14% | 1.18% | 2.10% | 0.62% | 3.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDMA and FTLS have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDMA has higher volatility (3.27%) compared to FTLS (2.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs FTLS's -20.54%.
On 5-year performance, FTLS leads with 10.06% vs 8.45% for GDMA. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, FTLS has been the lower-risk option at 2.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FTLS has performed better with a 10.06% return vs 8.45%. 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 1.38% for FTLS.
GDMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.88% for FTLS.
GDMA is categorized as Global Allocation, while FTLS is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 1.38% for FTLS.
FTLS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.49), 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 FTLS
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