GMAY vs. IVVB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GMAY (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May) and IVVB (iShares Large Cap Deep Buffer ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GMAY returned 12.38% vs 14.57% for IVVB. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GMAY charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IVVB.

Performance

GMAY vs. IVVB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May (GMAY) and iShares Large Cap Deep Buffer ETF (IVVB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GMAY having a 4.42% return and IVVB slightly higher at 4.57%.

GMAY

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: 1.29%
• YTD: 4.42%
• 6M: 5.09%
• 1Y: 12.38%
• 3Y*: 12.18%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IVVB

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 1.91%
• YTD: 4.57%
• 6M: 4.37%
• 1Y: 14.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMAY vs. IVVB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May	4.42%	11.94%	12.12%	5.34%
IVVB iShares Large Cap Deep Buffer ETF	4.57%	9.60%	18.66%	2.60%

Correlation

The correlation between GMAY and IVVB is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2023	0.84

The correlation between GMAY and IVVB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

GMAY vs. IVVB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GMAY	IVVB
Technology	36.2%	35.6%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.8%
Communication Services	10.9%	11.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.5%
Industrials	8.1%	8.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

GMAY vs. IVVB — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMAY

GMAY Risk / Return Rank: 85
GMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
GMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
GMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 88
GMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
GMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 92

IVVB

IVVB Risk / Return Rank: 58
IVVB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IVVB Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IVVB Omega Ratio Rank: 63
IVVB Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
IVVB Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

GMAY vs. IVVB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May (GMAY) and iShares Large Cap Deep Buffer ETF (IVVB). 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.

	GMAY	IVVB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.02	+0.60
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.94	2.82	+1.12
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.39	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.00	2.55	+1.46
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	23.44	10.94	+12.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GMAY vs. IVVB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMAY Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the IVVB Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMAY and IVVB, 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

	GMAY	IVVB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.61	2.02	+0.60
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.60	1.31	+0.29

Drawdowns

GMAY vs. IVVB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMAY drawdown since its inception was -11.75%, smaller than the maximum IVVB drawdown of -13.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMAY and IVVB.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMAY	IVVB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.75%	-13.08%	+1.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.11%	-5.75%	+2.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.35%	-0.15%	-0.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.72%	-1.61%	+0.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.53%	1.34%	-0.81%

Volatility

GMAY vs. IVVB - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May (GMAY) has a higher volatility of 1.21% compared to iShares Large Cap Deep Buffer ETF (IVVB) at 0.74%. This indicates that GMAY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IVVB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMAY	IVVB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.21%	0.74%	+0.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.71%	5.49%	-1.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.77%	7.27%	-2.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.85%	9.28%	-1.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.85%	9.28%	-1.43%

GMAY vs. IVVB - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMAY has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IVVB's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMAY vs. IVVB - Dividend Comparison

GMAY has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IVVB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IVVB iShares Large Cap Deep Buffer ETF	1.17%	1.22%	0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMAY and IVVB in my portfolio?

GMAY and IVVB have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMAY or IVVB?

GMAY has higher volatility (1.21%) compared to IVVB (0.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMAY dropped -11.75% vs IVVB's -13.08%.

Which ETF is better, GMAY or IVVB?

On 1-year performance, IVVB leads with 14.57% vs 12.38% for GMAY. On fees, IVVB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, IVVB has been the lower-risk option at 0.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMAY or IVVB?

Over the 1-year period, IVVB has performed better with a 14.57% return vs 12.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMAY or IVVB?

IVVB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GMAY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMAY or IVVB?

IVVB has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.00% for GMAY.

What is the main difference between GMAY and IVVB?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GMAY and 0.50% for IVVB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.02), 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.