GOLS vs. FMET

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

GOLS (Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF) and FMET (Fidelity Metaverse ETF) are both Communications Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.49 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GOLS charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FMET.

Performance

GOLS vs. FMET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF (GOLS) and Fidelity Metaverse ETF (FMET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

GOLS

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 0.21%
• 6M: 7.19%
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

FMET

• 1D: -1.79%
• 1M: 2.29%
• 6M: 13.62%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 1Y: 8.88%
• 3Y*: 14.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.05%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF	$108.77K	$103.07K	$144.49K
GOLS Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF	$153.76K	$158.80K	$111.31K

GOLS vs. FMET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
GOLS Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF	5.59%
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF	6.26%

Correlation

The correlation between GOLS and FMET is 0.49, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2026	0.49

Return for Risk

GOLS vs. FMET — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GOLS

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

FMET

FMET Risk / Return Rank: 17
FMET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
FMET Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
FMET Omega Ratio Rank: 18
FMET Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
FMET Martin Ratio Rank: 16

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

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.

	GOLS	FMET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.42	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	0.71	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.09	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	0.39	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	0.97	—

Drawdowns

GOLS vs. FMET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GOLS drawdown since its inception was -7.85%, smaller than the maximum FMET drawdown of -29.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GOLS and FMET.

Drawdown Indicators

	GOLS	FMET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.85%	-29.94%	+22.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-23.00%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.34%	-4.67%	+3.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.96%	-7.70%	+5.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	9.18%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GOLS	FMET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.06%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	17.45%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.76%	21.49%	-7.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.76%	24.34%	-10.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.76%	24.34%	-10.58%

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 0.49%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF	0.49%	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

Can I hold both GOLS and FMET in my portfolio?

GOLS and FMET have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GOLS or FMET?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, GOLS or FMET?

FMET is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for GOLS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GOLS or FMET?

FMET has the higher dividend yield at 0.49%, compared with 0.00% for GOLS.

What is the main difference between GOLS and FMET?

They also come from different issuers: Gabelli and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for GOLS and 0.39% for FMET.