GMMA vs. BSR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GMMA (GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF) and BSR (Beacon Selective Risk ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds - GMMA tracks the MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy Index while BSR tracks the NONE. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GMMA returned 8.28% vs 10.43% for BSR. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GMMA charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for BSR.

Performance

GMMA vs. BSR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) and Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMMA achieves a 1.98% return, which is significantly lower than BSR's 2.77% return.

GMMA

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: -0.80%
• YTD: 1.98%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 8.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BSR

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: -0.29%
• YTD: 2.77%
• 6M: 2.04%
• 1Y: 10.43%
• 3Y*: 7.09%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMMA vs. BSR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	1.98%	8.95%	0.22%
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	2.77%	4.21%	-0.08%

Correlation

The correlation between GMMA and BSR is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024	0.68

The correlation between GMMA and BSR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GMMA vs. BSR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMMA

GMMA Risk / Return Rank: 47
GMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
GMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
GMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 46
GMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
GMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 51

BSR

BSR Risk / Return Rank: 35
BSR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
BSR Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
BSR Omega Ratio Rank: 34
BSR Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
BSR Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

GMMA vs. BSR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) and Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR). 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.

	GMMA	BSR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.38	1.19	+0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.92	1.67	+0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.21	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	1.70	+0.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.01	4.57	+3.44

GMMA vs. BSR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is comparable to the BSR Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMMA and BSR, 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

GMMA vs. BSR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMMA drawdown since its inception was -5.21%, smaller than the maximum BSR drawdown of -15.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMMA and BSR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMMA	BSR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.21%	-15.68%	+10.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.39%	-6.15%	+2.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.98%	-4.99%	+3.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.24%	-4.58%	+3.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.04%	2.29%	-1.25%

Volatility

GMMA vs. BSR - Volatility Comparison

GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) has a higher volatility of 3.12% compared to Beacon Selective Risk ETF (BSR) at 2.41%. This indicates that GMMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMMA	BSR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.12%	2.41%	+0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.92%	6.52%	-1.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.05%	8.79%	-2.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.34%	16.17%	-8.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.34%	16.17%	-8.83%

GMMA vs. BSR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMMA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BSR's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMMA vs. BSR - Dividend Comparison

GMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.70%, more than BSR's 2.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BSR Beacon Selective Risk ETF	2.82%	2.89%	0.89%	1.08%
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.70%	3.00%	0.57%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMMA and BSR in my portfolio?

GMMA and BSR have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMMA or BSR?

GMMA has higher volatility (3.12%) compared to BSR (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMMA dropped -5.21% vs BSR's -15.68%.

Which ETF is better, GMMA or BSR?

On 1-year performance, BSR leads with 10.43% vs 8.28% for GMMA. On fees, GMMA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BSR has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMMA or BSR?

Over the 1-year period, BSR has performed better with a 10.43% return vs 8.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMMA or BSR?

GMMA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BSR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMMA or BSR?

GMMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.70%, compared with 2.82% for BSR.

What is the main difference between GMMA and BSR?

GMMA tracks MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy Index, while BSR tracks NONE. They also come from different issuers: GammaRoad Capital Partners and American Beacon. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GMMA and 1.10% for BSR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.19), 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.