GOLS vs. FMET
GOLS (Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF) and FMET (Fidelity Metaverse ETF) are both Communications Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GOLS charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FMET.
Performance
GOLS vs. FMET - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GOLS
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FMET
- 1D
- -5.54%
- 1M
- -0.79%
- YTD
- 4.54%
- 6M
- 2.97%
- 1Y
- 19.68%
- 3Y*
- 14.52%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GOLS vs. FMET - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GOLS Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF | 3.97% |
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF | 3.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between GOLS and FMET is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2026 | 0.56 |
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
GOLS vs. FMET — Risk / Return Rank
GOLS
FMET
GOLS vs. FMET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF (GOLS) and Fidelity Metaverse ETF (FMET). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GOLS | FMET | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 0.98 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.72 | 0.49 | +0.23 |
Drawdowns
GOLS vs. FMET - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GOLS drawdown since its inception was -7.85%, smaller than the maximum FMET drawdown of -29.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GOLS and FMET.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GOLS | FMET | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.85% | -29.22% | +21.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -23.00% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -25.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.29% | -6.21% | +3.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.96% | -7.46% | +5.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 8.64% | — |
Volatility
GOLS vs. FMET - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GOLS | FMET | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.05% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 15.78% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.56% | 20.19% | -6.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.56% | 24.33% | -10.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.56% | 24.33% | -10.77% |
GOLS vs. FMET - Expense Ratio Comparison
GOLS has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than FMET's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
GOLS vs. FMET - Dividend Comparison
GOLS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FMET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF | 0.53% | 0.81% | 0.44% | 0.40% | 0.18% |
GOLS Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GOLS and FMET have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FMET is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FMET is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for GOLS.
FMET has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.00% for GOLS.
They also come from different issuers: Gabelli and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for GOLS and 0.39% for FMET.
Find the right allocation for GOLS and FMET
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