GMOC vs. FLOT

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

GMOC (GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF) and FLOT (iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. GMOC is actively managed, while FLOT is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. GMOC charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FLOT.

Performance

GMOC vs. FLOT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF (GMOC) and iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMOC achieves a 1.65% return, which is significantly lower than FLOT's 1.87% return.

GMOC

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.65%
• 6M: 2.00%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLOT

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 1.87%
• 6M: 2.18%
• 1Y: 4.89%
• 3Y*: 5.61%
• 5Y*: 4.20%
• 10Y*: 3.03%

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

GMOC vs. FLOT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GMOC GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF	1.65%	0.76%
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF	1.87%	0.83%

Correlation

The correlation between GMOC and FLOT is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2025	-0.09

Return for Risk

GMOC vs. FLOT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLOT

FLOT Risk / Return Rank: 98
FLOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
FLOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
FLOT Omega Ratio Rank: 99
FLOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLOT Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

GMOC vs. FLOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF (GMOC) and iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GMOC	FLOT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	6.59	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	2.38	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	8.33	0.66	+7.67

Drawdowns

GMOC vs. FLOT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMOC drawdown since its inception was -0.13%, smaller than the maximum FLOT drawdown of -13.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMOC and FLOT.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMOC	FLOT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.13%	-13.54%	+13.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.43%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.57%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-2.36%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-13.54%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.02%	+0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.01%	-0.21%	+0.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.05%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GMOC	FLOT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.21%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.62%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49%	0.74%	-0.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.49%	1.77%	-1.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.49%	4.15%	-3.66%

GMOC vs. FLOT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMOC has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than FLOT's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

GMOC vs. FLOT - Dividend Comparison

GMOC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, less than FLOT's 4.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF	4.54%	4.84%	5.82%	5.66%	2.06%	0.43%	1.25%	2.78%	2.41%	1.46%	0.97%	0.53%
GMOC GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF	2.33%	0.84%	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 GMOC and FLOT in my portfolio?

GMOC and FLOT have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GMOC or FLOT?

On fees, FLOT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMOC or FLOT?

FLOT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for GMOC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMOC or FLOT?

FLOT has the higher dividend yield at 4.54%, compared with 2.33% for GMOC.

What is the main difference between GMOC and FLOT?

They also come from different issuers: GMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for GMOC and 0.15% for FLOT.