GDMA vs. UMI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDMA is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by Gadsden, while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDMA returned 7.66%/yr vs 20.29%/yr for UMI. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.

Performance

GDMA vs. UMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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 lower than UMI's 22.52% return.

GDMA

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

UMI

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: -1.04%
• YTD: 22.52%
• 6M: 22.06%
• 1Y: 23.91%
• 3Y*: 27.26%
• 5Y*: 20.29%
• 10Y*: —

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

GDMA vs. UMI - 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%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	22.52%	5.11%	42.97%	14.60%	20.78%	20.97%	-8.25%	21.06%	-9.03%

Correlation

The correlation between GDMA and UMI is 0.06, 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	0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.23
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018	0.27

Over the past year, the correlation between GDMA and UMI has dropped to 0.06 - well below their long-term average of 0.27, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

GDMA vs. UMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GDMA	UMI
Technology	23.4%	-
Financial Services	14.5%	-
Industrials	14.4%	-
Energy	10.0%	99.0%
Basic Materials	9.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	-
Communication Services	7.0%	-
Healthcare	5.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	-
Utilities	2.4%	1.0%
Real Estate	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

GDMA vs. UMI — 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

UMI

UMI Risk / Return Rank: 52
UMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
UMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
UMI Omega Ratio Rank: 47
UMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
UMI Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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	UMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.47	1.71	+0.76
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.21	2.36	+0.84
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.30	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.30	3.20	+1.10
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.92	8.90	+3.02
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. UMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is higher than the UMI Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDMA and UMI, 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	UMI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.47	1.71	+0.76
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80	1.04	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	0.62	+0.26

Drawdowns

GDMA vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum UMI drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and UMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDMA	UMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.66%	-48.08%	+31.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.53%	-7.50%	-0.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.53%	-17.08%	+9.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.74%	-20.05%	+7.31%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.06%	-4.76%	+3.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.78%	-6.60%	+2.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.71%	2.70%	+0.01%

Volatility

GDMA vs. UMI - Volatility Comparison

Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) have volatilities of 6.18% and 5.94%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDMA	UMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.18%	5.94%	+0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	10.98%	-0.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.12%	14.04%	-0.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.67%	19.55%	-9.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.97%	23.20%	-12.23%

GDMA vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDMA vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison

GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, less than UMI's 5.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	5.98%	6.23%	4.39%	4.67%	4.36%	3.00%	2.18%	2.47%	2.48%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDMA and UMI in my portfolio?

GDMA and UMI have a correlation of 0.06, 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 UMI?

GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to UMI (5.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs UMI's -48.08%.

Which ETF is better, GDMA or UMI?

On 5-year performance, UMI leads with 20.29% vs 7.66% for GDMA. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, UMI has been the lower-risk option at 5.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDMA or UMI?

Over the 5-year period, UMI has performed better with a 20.29% return vs 7.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDMA or UMI?

GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDMA or UMI?

UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.98%, compared with 2.51% for GDMA.

What is the main difference between GDMA and UMI?

GDMA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 0.85% for UMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.71), 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.