GMUB vs. FTGC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GMUB (Goldman Sachs Municipal Income ETF) and FTGC (First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - GMUB is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while FTGC is a Commodities fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GMUB returned 6.74% vs 28.18% for FTGC. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. GMUB charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FTGC.

Performance

GMUB vs. FTGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Municipal Income ETF (GMUB) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMUB achieves a 1.70% return, which is significantly lower than FTGC's 18.86% return.

GMUB

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.96%
• YTD: 1.70%
• 6M: 2.06%
• 1Y: 6.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FTGC

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -7.37%
• YTD: 18.86%
• 6M: 17.54%
• 1Y: 28.18%
• 3Y*: 14.26%
• 5Y*: 12.29%
• 10Y*: 7.15%

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

GMUB vs. FTGC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GMUB Goldman Sachs Municipal Income ETF	1.70%	5.99%	1.11%
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund	18.86%	14.61%	5.17%

Correlation

The correlation between GMUB and FTGC is -0.17, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2024	-0.13

Return for Risk

GMUB vs. FTGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMUB

GMUB Risk / Return Rank: 79
GMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
GMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
GMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 89
GMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
GMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 64

FTGC

FTGC Risk / Return Rank: 55
FTGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
FTGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
FTGC Omega Ratio Rank: 54
FTGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FTGC Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

GMUB vs. FTGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Municipal Income ETF (GMUB) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). 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.

	GMUB	FTGC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	1.82	+0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	2.46	+1.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.32	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.96	2.60	+0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.56	9.67	+0.89

GMUB vs. FTGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMUB Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is higher than the FTGC Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMUB and FTGC, 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

GMUB vs. FTGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMUB drawdown since its inception was -3.28%, smaller than the maximum FTGC drawdown of -59.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMUB and FTGC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMUB	FTGC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.28%	-59.47%	+56.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.29%	-10.87%	+8.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.87%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.64%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-10.87%	+10.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.63%	-27.34%	+26.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.64%	2.94%	-2.30%

Volatility

GMUB vs. FTGC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Municipal Income ETF (GMUB) is 0.56%, while First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) has a volatility of 3.07%. This indicates that GMUB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMUB	FTGC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.56%	3.07%	-2.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.90%	13.21%	-11.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.70%	15.70%	-13.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.27%	15.87%	-12.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.27%	14.71%	-11.44%

GMUB vs. FTGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMUB has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGC's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMUB vs. FTGC - Dividend Comparison

GMUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.25%, less than FTGC's 16.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund	16.13%	17.74%	3.05%	3.34%	10.35%	7.21%	0.00%	0.81%	0.80%	1.21%
GMUB Goldman Sachs Municipal Income ETF	3.25%	3.14%	1.46%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMUB and FTGC in my portfolio?

GMUB and FTGC have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMUB or FTGC?

FTGC has higher volatility (3.07%) compared to GMUB (0.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMUB dropped -3.28% vs FTGC's -59.47%.

Which ETF is better, GMUB or FTGC?

On 1-year performance, FTGC leads with 28.18% vs 6.74% for GMUB. On fees, GMUB is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, GMUB has been the lower-risk option at 0.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMUB or FTGC?

Over the 1-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 28.18% return vs 6.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMUB or FTGC?

GMUB is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FTGC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMUB or FTGC?

FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 16.13%, compared with 3.25% for GMUB.

What is the main difference between GMUB and FTGC?

GMUB is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FTGC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for GMUB and 0.95% for FTGC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 1.82), 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.