PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GDMA vs. QMNNX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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 Class N (QMNNX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDMA achieves a 8.05% return, which is significantly higher than QMNNX's -8.20% return.


GDMA

1D
-0.41%
1M
-1.35%
6M
0.93%
YTD
8.05%
1Y
21.36%
3Y*
15.55%
5Y*
8.35%
10Y*

QMNNX

1D
-0.27%
1M
-1.58%
6M
-5.08%
YTD
-8.20%
1Y
3.57%
3Y*
17.24%
5Y*
17.71%
10Y*
5.75%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
GDMA
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF
8.05%25.29%7.44%1.72%-2.08%3.95%21.08%11.59%-3.70%
QMNNX
AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund Class N
-8.20%26.19%25.43%16.30%27.07%17.38%-19.79%-11.55%1.25%

Correlation

The correlation between GDMA and QMNNX is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.08

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.04

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 2018

0.04

The correlation between GDMA and QMNNX shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.04 (all time), 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. QMNNX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDMA
GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

QMNNX
QMNNX Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
QMNNX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMNNX Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMNNX Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
QMNNX Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMNNX Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank
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 Class 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.

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.


GDMAQMNNXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.09

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.85

0.35

+2.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.99

0.78

+6.21

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is higher than the QMNNX Sharpe Ratio of 0.52. 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.


Loading charts...

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GDMAQMNNXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.66%

-39.22%

+22.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.53%

-9.96%

+2.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.53%

-9.96%

+2.43%

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

-5.41%

-8.57%

+3.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.78%

-10.58%

+6.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.06%

4.48%

-1.42%

Volatility

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Volatility Comparison

Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 7.03% compared to AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund Class N (QMNNX) at 2.25%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GDMAQMNNXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.03%

2.25%

+4.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.20%

5.40%

+7.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.77%

6.76%

+9.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.33%

9.30%

+1.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.40%

8.32%

+3.08%

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than QMNNX's 1.62% expense ratio.


Dividends

GDMA vs. QMNNX - Dividend Comparison

GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, more than QMNNX's 1.37% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GDMA
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF
2.58%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 Class N
1.37%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


GDMA and QMNNX have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GDMA has higher volatility (7.03%) compared to QMNNX (2.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs QMNNX's -39.22%.

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 0.52), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GDMA and QMNNX

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