GMMA vs. QQWZ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GMMA (GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF) and QQWZ (Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GMMA is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy Index, while QQWZ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Pacer. GMMA is passively managed, while QQWZ is actively managed. Over the past year, GMMA returned 11.11% vs 36.51% for QQWZ. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GMMA charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for QQWZ.

Performance

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) and Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMMA achieves a 3.89% return, which is significantly lower than QQWZ's 18.35% return.

GMMA

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 3.22%
• YTD: 3.89%
• 6M: 4.03%
• 1Y: 11.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQWZ

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 8.73%
• YTD: 18.35%
• 6M: 15.96%
• 1Y: 36.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.89%	7.15%
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	18.35%	26.23%

Correlation

The correlation between GMMA and QQWZ 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 May 8, 2025	0.69

The correlation between GMMA and QQWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GMMA vs. QQWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMMA

GMMA Risk / Return Rank: 66
GMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
GMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
GMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 71
GMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
GMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 64

QQWZ

QQWZ Risk / Return Rank: 83
QQWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QQWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
QQWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QQWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QQWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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. QQWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) and Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ). 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	QQWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	2.67	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.99	3.55	-0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.47	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.29	4.70	-1.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.46	17.30	-5.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the QQWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMMA and QQWZ, 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

	GMMA	QQWZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	2.67	-0.57
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.11	3.20	-2.10

Drawdowns

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMMA drawdown since its inception was -5.21%, smaller than the maximum QQWZ drawdown of -7.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMMA and QQWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMMA	QQWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.21%	-7.81%	+2.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.39%	-7.81%	+4.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-0.72%	+0.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.23%	-1.36%	+0.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.97%	2.12%	-1.15%

Volatility

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) is 1.85%, while Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) has a volatility of 4.36%. This indicates that GMMA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMMA	QQWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.85%	4.36%	-2.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.09%	8.84%	-4.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.32%	13.76%	-8.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.10%	14.21%	-7.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.10%	14.21%	-7.11%

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMMA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than QQWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMMA vs. QQWZ - Dividend Comparison

GMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.64%, more than QQWZ's 0.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.64%	3.00%	0.57%
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	0.56%	0.11%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMMA and QQWZ in my portfolio?

GMMA and QQWZ 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 QQWZ?

QQWZ has higher volatility (4.36%) compared to GMMA (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMMA dropped -5.21% vs QQWZ's -7.81%.

Which ETF is better, GMMA or QQWZ?

On 1-year performance, QQWZ leads with 36.51% vs 11.11% for GMMA. On fees, QQWZ is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GMMA has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMMA or QQWZ?

Over the 1-year period, QQWZ has performed better with a 36.51% return vs 11.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMMA or QQWZ?

QQWZ is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GMMA.

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

GMMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.64%, compared with 0.56% for QQWZ.

What is the main difference between GMMA and QQWZ?

GMMA is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while QQWZ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: GammaRoad Capital Partners and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GMMA and 0.49% for QQWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.10), 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.