GMMA vs. ESBG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GMMA (GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF) and ESBG (First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. GMMA is passively managed, while ESBG is actively managed. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GMMA charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for ESBG.

Performance

GMMA vs. ESBG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) and First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMMA achieves a 3.61% return, which is significantly lower than ESBG's 5.13% return.

GMMA

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 3.45%
• YTD: 3.61%
• 6M: 3.75%
• 1Y: 10.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ESBG

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: 1.36%
• YTD: 5.13%
• 6M: 6.51%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMMA vs. ESBG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.61%	1.22%
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF	5.13%	5.72%

Correlation

The correlation between GMMA and ESBG is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2025	0.53

Return for Risk

GMMA vs. ESBG — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMMA

GMMA Risk / Return Rank: 65
GMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
GMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
GMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 68
GMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
GMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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. ESBG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) and First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG). 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.

	GMMA	ESBG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.92	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.19	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GMMA	ESBG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.09	0.88	+0.21

Drawdowns

GMMA vs. ESBG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMMA drawdown since its inception was -5.21%, smaller than the maximum ESBG drawdown of -18.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMMA and ESBG.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMMA	ESBG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.21%	-18.84%	+13.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-10.85%	+10.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.23%	-6.24%	+5.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.97%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GMMA	ESBG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.88%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.09%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.32%	25.27%	-19.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.10%	25.27%	-18.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.10%	25.27%	-18.17%

GMMA vs. ESBG - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMMA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than ESBG's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMMA vs. ESBG - Dividend Comparison

GMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.65%, more than ESBG's 0.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF	0.58%	0.24%	0.00%
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.65%	3.00%	0.57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMMA and ESBG in my portfolio?

GMMA and ESBG have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GMMA or ESBG?

On fees, GMMA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMMA or ESBG?

GMMA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ESBG.

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

GMMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.65%, compared with 0.58% for ESBG.

What is the main difference between GMMA and ESBG?

They also come from different issuers: GammaRoad Capital Partners and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GMMA and 0.95% for ESBG.