GMOM vs. MFUT

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

GMOM (Cambria Global Momentum ETF) and MFUT (Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Cambria, while MFUT is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Cambria. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GMOM returned 21.97% vs 27.19% for MFUT. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GMOM charges 0.96%/yr vs 1.18%/yr for MFUT.

Performance

GMOM vs. MFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) and Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMOM achieves a 5.91% return, which is significantly lower than MFUT's 13.12% return.

GMOM

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: -4.96%
• YTD: 5.91%
• 6M: 4.60%
• 1Y: 21.97%
• 3Y*: 11.69%
• 5Y*: 6.15%
• 10Y*: 7.06%

MFUT

• 1D: 2.00%
• 1M: -5.54%
• YTD: 13.12%
• 6M: 11.72%
• 1Y: 27.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMOM vs. MFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF	5.91%	20.63%	-0.22%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	13.12%	-1.83%	-16.64%

Correlation

The correlation between GMOM and MFUT 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2024	0.45

The correlation between GMOM and MFUT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.45 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GMOM vs. MFUT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMOM

GMOM Risk / Return Rank: 51
GMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
GMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
GMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 49
GMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
GMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 53

MFUT

MFUT Risk / Return Rank: 60
MFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
MFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
MFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 66
MFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
MFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

GMOM vs. MFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) and Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT). 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.

	GMOM	MFUT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	1.78	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	2.23	-0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.35	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.31	2.76	-0.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.13	8.59	-0.47

GMOM vs. MFUT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the MFUT Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMOM and MFUT, 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

GMOM vs. MFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMOM drawdown since its inception was -25.03%, smaller than the maximum MFUT drawdown of -29.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMOM and MFUT.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMOM	MFUT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.03%	-29.28%	+4.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.57%	-9.89%	+0.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.16%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.04%	-8.09%	+1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.79%	-16.25%	+8.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.71%	3.17%	-0.46%

Volatility

GMOM vs. MFUT - Volatility Comparison

Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) and Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) have volatilities of 5.26% and 5.38%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMOM	MFUT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.26%	5.38%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.11%	13.46%	-1.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.49%	15.39%	-0.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.50%	13.66%	+0.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.91%	13.66%	-0.75%

GMOM vs. MFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMOM has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is lower than MFUT's 1.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMOM vs. MFUT - Dividend Comparison

GMOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.54%, while MFUT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF	1.54%	3.01%	2.16%	3.63%	2.52%	3.42%	1.24%	2.60%	1.90%	2.05%	1.77%	1.88%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.33%	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 GMOM and MFUT in my portfolio?

GMOM and MFUT 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 is riskier, GMOM or MFUT?

MFUT has higher volatility (5.38%) compared to GMOM (5.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMOM dropped -25.03% vs MFUT's -29.28%.

Which ETF is better, GMOM or MFUT?

On 1-year performance, MFUT leads with 27.19% vs 21.97% for GMOM. On fees, GMOM is cheaper at 0.96% per year. On volatility, GMOM has been the lower-risk option at 5.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMOM or MFUT?

Over the 1-year period, MFUT has performed better with a 27.19% return vs 21.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMOM or MFUT?

GMOM is cheaper with a 0.96% expense ratio, compared with 1.18% for MFUT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMOM or MFUT?

GMOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.54%, compared with 0.00% for MFUT.

What is the main difference between GMOM and MFUT?

GMOM is categorized as Momentum, while MFUT is Systematic Trend. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for GMOM and 1.18% for MFUT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MFUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.52), 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.