GMOC vs. FLTR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GMOC (GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF) and FLTR (VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GMOC is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by GMO, while FLTR is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. GMOC is actively managed, while FLTR is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. GMOC charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLTR.

Performance

GMOC vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMOC achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly lower than FLTR's 2.19% return.

GMOC

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 1.81%
• 6M: 1.97%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLTR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 2.19%
• 6M: 2.32%
• 1Y: 5.21%
• 3Y*: 6.16%
• 5Y*: 4.54%
• 10Y*: 3.49%

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

GMOC vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GMOC GMO Ultra-Short Income ETF	1.81%	0.70%
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF	2.19%	0.95%

Correlation

The correlation between GMOC and FLTR is -0.02, 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 28, 2025	-0.02

Return for Risk

GMOC vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMOC

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

FLTR

FLTR Risk / Return Rank: 99
FLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
FLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
FLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 99
FLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
FLTR 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. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	GMOC	FLTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	6.50	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	12.09	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	3.02	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	16.69	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	97.91	—

Drawdowns

GMOC vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMOC drawdown since its inception was -0.14%, smaller than the maximum FLTR drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMOC and FLTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMOC	FLTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.14%	-17.84%	+17.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.31%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.93%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-3.06%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-17.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.01%	-0.67%	+0.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.05%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GMOC	FLTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.29%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.66%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50%	0.81%	-0.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.50%	2.13%	-1.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.50%	5.00%	-4.50%

GMOC vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMOC has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTR's 0.14% 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. FLTR - Dividend Comparison

GMOC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, less than FLTR's 4.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF	4.72%	4.97%	5.93%	6.07%	2.29%	0.63%	1.49%	3.05%	2.67%	1.69%	1.16%	0.71%
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 FLTR in my portfolio?

GMOC and FLTR have a correlation of -0.02, 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 FLTR?

On fees, FLTR is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMOC or FLTR?

FLTR is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for GMOC.

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

FLTR has the higher dividend yield at 4.72%, compared with 2.33% for GMOC.

What is the main difference between GMOC and FLTR?

GMOC is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while FLTR is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: GMO and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for GMOC and 0.14% for FLTR.