GMOM vs. MTUL
GMOM (Cambria Global Momentum ETF) and MTUL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN) are both Momentum funds. GMOM is actively managed, while MTUL is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GMOM returned 7.06%/yr vs 20.13%/yr for MTUL. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GMOM charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for MTUL.
Performance
GMOM vs. MTUL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GMOM achieves a 11.82% return, which is significantly lower than MTUL's 61.40% return.
GMOM
- 1D
- 0.24%
- 1M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 11.82%
- 6M
- 13.95%
- 1Y
- 29.52%
- 3Y*
- 13.91%
- 5Y*
- 7.06%
- 10Y*
- 7.62%
MTUL
- 1D
- 0.74%
- 1M
- 23.35%
- YTD
- 61.40%
- 6M
- 63.02%
- 1Y
- 78.14%
- 3Y*
- 60.02%
- 5Y*
- 20.13%
- 10Y*
- —
GMOM vs. MTUL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF | 11.82% | 20.63% | 6.75% | 0.65% | -2.82% | 12.95% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 61.40% | 27.42% | 58.70% | 10.66% | -37.97% | 7.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between GMOM and MTUL is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021 | 0.59 |
The correlation between GMOM and MTUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
GMOM vs. MTUL — Risk / Return Rank
GMOM
MTUL
GMOM vs. MTUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL). 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.
| GMOM | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.32 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.10 | 3.29 | -0.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.12 | 13.17 | -1.06 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GMOM | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.18 | 1.79 | +0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 | 0.47 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.49 | 0.41 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
GMOM vs. MTUL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GMOM drawdown since its inception was -25.03%, smaller than the maximum MTUL drawdown of -56.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMOM and MTUL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GMOM | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.03% | -56.83% | +31.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.57% | -23.86% | +14.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.73% | -39.15% | +25.42% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.16% | -56.83% | +37.67% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.03% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.85% | -0.01% | -1.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.81% | -22.66% | +14.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.44% | 5.95% | -3.51% |
Volatility
GMOM vs. MTUL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) is 3.23%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a volatility of 20.00%. This indicates that GMOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GMOM | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.23% | 20.00% | -16.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.18% | 37.62% | -26.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.61% | 43.98% | -30.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.41% | 42.80% | -28.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.82% | 43.63% | -30.81% |
GMOM vs. MTUL - Expense Ratio Comparison
GMOM has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than MTUL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
GMOM vs. MTUL - Dividend Comparison
GMOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, while MTUL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF | 1.58% | 3.01% | 2.16% | 3.63% | 2.52% | 3.42% | 1.24% | 2.60% | 1.90% | 2.05% | 1.77% | 1.88% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GMOM and MTUL have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MTUL has higher volatility (20.00%) compared to GMOM (3.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMOM dropped -25.03% vs MTUL's -56.83%.
On 5-year performance, MTUL leads with 20.13% vs 7.06% for GMOM. On fees, MTUL is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, GMOM has been the lower-risk option at 3.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 20.13% return vs 7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MTUL is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for GMOM.
GMOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.58%, compared with 0.00% for MTUL.
They also come from different issuers: Cambria and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for GMOM and 0.95% for MTUL.
GMOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.79), 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.
Find the right allocation for GMOM and MTUL
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer