GDMA vs. QMNNX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and QMNNX (AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund N) are both funds - GDMA is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by Gadsden, while QMNNX is a Equity Market Neutral fund managed by AQR Funds. Over the past 5 years, GDMA returned 7.66%/yr vs 16.89%/yr for QMNNX. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 5.28%/yr for QMNNX.

Performance

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund N (QMNNX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDMA achieves a 11.18% return, which is significantly higher than QMNNX's -5.98% return.

GDMA

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: 1.83%
• YTD: 11.18%
• 6M: 14.08%
• 1Y: 32.26%
• 3Y*: 16.91%
• 5Y*: 7.66%
• 10Y*: —

QMNNX

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 1.06%
• YTD: -5.98%
• 6M: -3.13%
• 1Y: 3.33%
• 3Y*: 19.60%
• 5Y*: 16.89%
• 10Y*: 6.01%

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

GDMA vs. QMNNX - 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%
QMNNX AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund N	-5.98%	26.19%	25.43%	16.30%	27.07%	17.38%	-19.79%	-11.55%	1.63%

Correlation

The correlation between GDMA and QMNNX is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.08
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018	0.04

The correlation between GDMA and QMNNX shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to 0.04 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

GDMA vs. QMNNX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDMA

GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 74
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 65

QMNNX

QMNNX Risk / Return Rank: 5
QMNNX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
QMNNX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
QMNNX Omega Ratio Rank: 6
QMNNX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
QMNNX Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund N (QMNNX). 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	QMNNX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.47	0.50	+1.97
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.21	0.73	+2.48
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.09	+0.38
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.30	0.40	+3.90
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.92	0.93	+10.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is higher than the QMNNX Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDMA and QMNNX, 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

	GDMA	QMNNX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.47	0.50	+1.97
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80	1.81	-1.01
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	0.83	+0.06

Drawdowns

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum QMNNX drawdown of -39.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and QMNNX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDMA	QMNNX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.66%	-39.22%	+22.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.53%	-8.41%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.53%	-8.41%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.74%	-13.98%	+1.24%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.22%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.06%	-6.37%	+5.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.78%	-10.61%	+6.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.71%	3.61%	-0.90%

Volatility

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Volatility Comparison

Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 6.18% compared to AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund N (QMNNX) at 2.81%. This indicates that GDMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QMNNX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDMA	QMNNX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.18%	2.81%	+3.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	5.26%	+4.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.12%	6.74%	+6.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.67%	9.40%	+0.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.97%	8.30%	+2.67%

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than QMNNX's 5.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Dividend Comparison

GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, more than QMNNX's 1.34% 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%
QMNNX AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund N	1.34%	1.26%	6.06%	21.67%	5.77%	1.41%	17.64%	3.86%	0.49%	3.37%	1.19%	2.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDMA and QMNNX in my portfolio?

GDMA and QMNNX have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDMA or QMNNX?

GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to QMNNX (2.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs QMNNX's -39.22%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 0.50), 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.