GMOM vs. PTF
GMOM (Cambria Global Momentum ETF) and PTF (Invesco Dorsey Wright Technology Momentum ETF) are both Momentum funds. GMOM is actively managed, while PTF is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GMOM returned 7.06%/yr vs 27.36%/yr for PTF. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GMOM charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for PTF.
Performance
GMOM vs. PTF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GMOM achieves a 5.91% return, which is significantly lower than PTF's 72.89% return. Over the past 10 years, GMOM has underperformed PTF with an annualized return of 7.06%, while PTF has yielded a comparatively higher 27.36% annualized 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%
PTF
- 1D
- 4.41%
- 1M
- 1.65%
- YTD
- 72.89%
- 6M
- 67.11%
- 1Y
- 97.39%
- 3Y*
- 42.66%
- 5Y*
- 21.85%
- 10Y*
- 27.36%
GMOM vs. PTF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GMOM Cambria Global Momentum ETF | 5.91% | 20.63% | 6.75% | 0.65% | -2.82% | 19.13% | 2.42% | 8.24% | -9.61% | 20.67% |
PTF Invesco Dorsey Wright Technology Momentum ETF | 72.89% | 5.68% | 43.65% | 33.73% | -31.75% | 18.10% | 82.06% | 46.71% | 0.01% | 32.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between GMOM and PTF is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2014 | 0.50 |
The correlation between GMOM and PTF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.59 - 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. PTF — Risk / Return Rank
GMOM
PTF
GMOM vs. PTF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) and Invesco Dorsey Wright Technology Momentum ETF (PTF). 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 | PTF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.37 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 5.44 | -3.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.13 | 20.48 | -12.36 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GMOM vs. PTF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GMOM drawdown since its inception was -25.03%, smaller than the maximum PTF drawdown of -55.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMOM and PTF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GMOM | PTF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.03% | -55.38% | +30.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.57% | -17.99% | +8.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.73% | -36.11% | +22.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.16% | -44.88% | +25.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.03% | -44.88% | +19.85% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.04% | -4.42% | -2.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.79% | -13.25% | +5.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.71% | 4.77% | -2.06% |
Volatility
GMOM vs. PTF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) is 5.26%, while Invesco Dorsey Wright Technology Momentum ETF (PTF) has a volatility of 17.54%. This indicates that GMOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PTF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GMOM | PTF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.26% | 17.54% | -12.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.11% | 32.12% | -20.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.49% | 41.61% | -27.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.50% | 35.65% | -21.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.91% | 33.31% | -20.40% |
GMOM vs. PTF - Expense Ratio Comparison
GMOM has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than PTF's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
GMOM vs. PTF - Dividend Comparison
GMOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.54%, more than PTF's 0.01% yield.
| 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% |
PTF Invesco Dorsey Wright Technology Momentum ETF | 0.01% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.07% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.08% | 0.04% | 0.26% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GMOM and PTF have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PTF has higher volatility (17.54%) compared to GMOM (5.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMOM dropped -25.03% vs PTF's -55.38%.
On 10-year performance, PTF leads with 27.36% vs 7.06% for GMOM. On fees, PTF is cheaper at 0.60% 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.
Over the 10-year period, PTF has performed better with a 27.36% return vs 7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PTF is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for GMOM.
GMOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.54%, compared with 0.01% for PTF.
They also come from different issuers: Cambria and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for GMOM and 0.60% for PTF.
PTF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 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.
Find the right allocation for GMOM and PTF
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