GGRW vs. CLSE

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE).

GGRW and CLSE are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GGRW is an actively managed fund by GAMCO Investors, Inc.. It was launched on Feb 16, 2021. CLSE is an actively managed fund by Convergence Investment Partners. It was launched on Feb 22, 2022.

Performance

GGRW vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GGRW vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GGRW Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF	-6.65%	18.29%	41.78%	42.19%	-30.22%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	4.79%	20.44%	35.54%	17.54%	-3.04%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GGRW achieves a -6.65% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 4.79% return.

GGRW

• 1D: 1.18%
• 1M: -4.93%
• YTD: -6.65%
• 6M: -6.45%
• 1Y: 16.38%
• 3Y*: 24.77%
• 5Y*: 7.71%
• 10Y*: —

CLSE

• 1D: 1.78%
• 1M: 1.27%
• YTD: 4.79%
• 6M: 10.66%
• 1Y: 32.89%
• 3Y*: 24.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GGRW vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

GGRW has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSE's 1.56% expense ratio.

CLSE

Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF

GGRW

Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF

Return for Risk

GGRW vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGRW

GGRW Risk / Return Rank: 44
GGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
GGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
GGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 43
GGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 47

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 94
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 92
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

GGRW vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.

	GGRW	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.82	2.27	-1.46
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.29	2.95	-1.65
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.41	-0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.30	4.29	-2.99
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.82	20.29	-15.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GGRW vs. CLSE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GGRW Sharpe Ratio is 0.82, which is lower than the CLSE Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GGRW and CLSE, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GGRW	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82	2.27	-1.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	1.28	-1.07

Correlation

The correlation between GGRW and CLSE is 0.64, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

GGRW vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

GGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, less than CLSE's 0.91% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GGRW Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF	0.46%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.91%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%

Drawdowns

GGRW vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GGRW drawdown since its inception was -50.28%, which is greater than CLSE's maximum drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GGRW and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	GGRW	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.28%	-16.45%	-33.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.19%	-7.88%	-5.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.28%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.13%	-0.80%	-8.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.91%	-3.73%	-14.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.57%	1.67%	+1.90%

Volatility

GGRW vs. CLSE - Volatility Comparison

Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) has a higher volatility of 6.64% compared to Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) at 5.74%. This indicates that GGRW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GGRW	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.64%	5.74%	+0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.56%	10.49%	+1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.20%	14.55%	+5.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.47%	13.87%	+11.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.77%	13.87%	+11.90%