GDMA vs. GMOM
GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and GMOM (Cambria Global Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDMA is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by Gadsden, while GMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Cambria. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDMA returned 7.66%/yr vs 7.01%/yr for GMOM. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for GMOM.
Performance
GDMA vs. GMOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GDMA having a 11.18% return and GMOM slightly higher at 11.55%.
GDMA
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 1.83%
- YTD
- 11.18%
- 6M
- 14.08%
- 1Y
- 32.26%
- 3Y*
- 16.91%
- 5Y*
- 7.66%
- 10Y*
- —
GMOM
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- 0.88%
- YTD
- 11.55%
- 6M
- 13.63%
- 1Y
- 29.29%
- 3Y*
- 13.75%
- 5Y*
- 7.01%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
GDMA vs. GMOM - 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% |
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF | 11.55% | 20.63% | 6.75% | 0.65% | -2.82% | 19.13% | 2.42% | 8.24% | -2.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDMA and GMOM is 0.69, 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 | 0.69 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018 | 0.58 |
The correlation between GDMA and GMOM shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (5 years) to 0.69 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GDMA vs. GMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GDMA
GMOM
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
GDMA
GMOM
Financial Services
GDMA
GMOM
Industrials
GDMA
GMOM
Energy
GDMA
GMOM
Basic Materials
GDMA
GMOM
Consumer Cyclical
GDMA
GMOM
Communication Services
GDMA
GMOM
Healthcare
GDMA
GMOM
Consumer Defensive
GDMA
GMOM
Utilities
GDMA
GMOM
Real Estate
GDMA
GMOM
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. GMOM — Risk / Return Rank
GDMA
GMOM
GDMA vs. GMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM). 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 | GMOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.47 | 2.16 | +0.31 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.21 | 2.86 | +0.34 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.39 | +0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.30 | 3.07 | +1.23 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.92 | 12.03 | -0.12 |
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 | GMOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.47 | 2.16 | +0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 | 0.49 | +0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.60 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.89 | 0.49 | +0.40 |
Drawdowns
GDMA vs. GMOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum GMOM drawdown of -25.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and GMOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDMA | GMOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.66% | -25.03% | +8.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -9.57% | +2.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.53% | -13.73% | +6.20% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.74% | -19.16% | +6.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -25.03% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.06% | -2.09% | +1.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -7.81% | +4.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.71% | 2.44% | +0.27% |
Volatility
GDMA vs. GMOM - Volatility Comparison
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 6.18% compared to Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) at 3.29%. This indicates that GDMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDMA | GMOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.18% | 3.29% | +2.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.03% | 11.18% | -1.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.12% | 13.61% | -0.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.67% | 14.41% | -4.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.97% | 12.82% | -1.85% |
GDMA vs. GMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than GMOM's 0.96% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDMA vs. GMOM - Dividend Comparison
GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, more than GMOM's 1.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF | 1.58% | 3.01% | 2.16% | 3.63% | 2.52% | 3.42% | 1.24% | 2.60% | 1.90% | 2.05% | 1.77% | 1.88% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDMA and GMOM have a correlation of 0.69, 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 GMOM (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs GMOM's -25.03%.
On 5-year performance, GDMA leads with 7.66% vs 7.01% for GMOM. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, GMOM has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. 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 7.01%. 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 0.96% for GMOM.
GDMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 1.58% for GMOM.
GDMA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while GMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 0.96% for GMOM.
GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.16), 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 GMOM
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