GMF vs. WNTR

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

GMF (SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF) and WNTR (YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GMF is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index, while WNTR is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax. GMF is passively managed, while WNTR is actively managed. Over the past year, GMF returned 23.99% vs 115.98% for WNTR. At a correlation of -0.36, they often move in opposite directions. GMF charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for WNTR.

Performance

GMF vs. WNTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMF achieves a 11.36% return, which is significantly lower than WNTR's 17.65% return.

GMF

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: -0.77%
• YTD: 11.36%
• 6M: 11.27%
• 1Y: 23.99%
• 3Y*: 18.52%
• 5Y*: 5.05%
• 10Y*: 10.31%

WNTR

• 1D: 6.51%
• 1M: 45.64%
• YTD: 17.65%
• 6M: 21.49%
• 1Y: 115.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMF vs. WNTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	11.36%	19.90%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	17.65%	52.78%

Correlation

The correlation between GMF and WNTR is -0.35, 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	-0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025	-0.37

Return for Risk

GMF vs. WNTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMF

GMF Risk / Return Rank: 44
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 44
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 46

WNTR

WNTR Risk / Return Rank: 63
WNTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
WNTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
WNTR Omega Ratio Rank: 64
WNTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
WNTR Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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.

GMF vs. WNTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). 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.

	GMF	WNTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	2.20	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.95	2.46	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.33	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	2.73	-0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.90	6.99	-0.09

GMF vs. WNTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is lower than the WNTR Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMF and WNTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GMF vs. WNTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMF drawdown since its inception was -67.18%, which is greater than WNTR's maximum drawdown of -42.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMF and WNTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMF	WNTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.18%	-42.65%	-24.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.62%	-42.65%	+30.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.43%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.18%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.23%	-4.02%	-0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.55%	-20.87%	+4.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	16.66%	-13.17%

Volatility

GMF vs. WNTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) is 7.93%, while YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR) has a volatility of 18.14%. This indicates that GMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WNTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMF	WNTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.93%	18.14%	-10.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.27%	46.41%	-31.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.63%	53.16%	-35.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.78%	53.31%	-34.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.22%	53.31%	-34.09%

GMF vs. WNTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than WNTR's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMF vs. WNTR - Dividend Comparison

GMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than WNTR's 94.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	1.21%	1.49%	1.92%	2.75%	2.54%	2.71%	1.32%	1.75%	2.26%	1.70%	2.49%	3.76%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	94.34%	58.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMF and WNTR in my portfolio?

GMF and WNTR have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMF or WNTR?

WNTR has higher volatility (18.14%) compared to GMF (7.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMF dropped -67.18% vs WNTR's -42.65%.

Which ETF is better, GMF or WNTR?

On 1-year performance, WNTR leads with 115.98% vs 23.99% for GMF. On fees, GMF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 7.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMF or WNTR?

Over the 1-year period, WNTR has performed better with a 115.98% return vs 23.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMF or WNTR?

GMF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for WNTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMF or WNTR?

WNTR has the higher dividend yield at 94.34%, compared with 1.21% for GMF.

What is the main difference between GMF and WNTR?

GMF is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while WNTR is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: State Street and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GMF and 1.01% for WNTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WNTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.37), 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.