GPZ vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GPZ (VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GPZ is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Alternative Asset Managers Index, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. GPZ is passively managed, while CAOS is actively managed. Over the past year, GPZ returned -11.53% vs 1.62% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.28, they often move in opposite directions. GPZ charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

GPZ vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GPZ achieves a -19.30% return, which is significantly lower than CAOS's 0.71% return.

GPZ

• 1D: -2.58%
• 1M: -5.07%
• YTD: -19.30%
• 6M: -20.44%
• 1Y: -11.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: -0.12%
• YTD: 0.71%
• 6M: 0.61%
• 1Y: 1.62%
• 3Y*: 3.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GPZ vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF	-19.30%	9.24%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.71%	1.07%

Correlation

The correlation between GPZ and CAOS is -0.26, 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	-0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025	-0.28

Return for Risk

GPZ vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GPZ

GPZ Risk / Return Rank: 6
GPZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
GPZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
GPZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5
GPZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
GPZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 36
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

GPZ vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	GPZ	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.42	1.08	-1.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.41	1.72	-2.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.22	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.36	2.15	-2.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.73	5.18	-5.91

GPZ vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.42, which is lower than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPZ and CAOS, 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

GPZ vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPZ drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPZ and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPZ	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-3.89%	-27.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.72%	-0.76%	-30.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.87%	-1.18%	-24.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.27%	-0.92%	-11.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.80%	0.32%	+15.48%

Volatility

GPZ vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) has a higher volatility of 9.25% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.32%. This indicates that GPZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GPZ	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.25%	0.32%	+8.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.33%	1.05%	+21.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.85%	1.50%	+26.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.60%	4.23%	+23.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.60%	4.23%	+23.37%

GPZ vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPZ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPZ vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

GPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.03%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF	1.03%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GPZ and CAOS in my portfolio?

GPZ and CAOS have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GPZ or CAOS?

GPZ has higher volatility (9.25%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPZ dropped -31.72% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, GPZ or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, CAOS leads with 1.62% vs -11.53% for GPZ. On fees, GPZ is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GPZ or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, CAOS has performed better with a 1.62% return vs -11.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GPZ or CAOS?

GPZ is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GPZ or CAOS?

GPZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.03%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between GPZ and CAOS?

GPZ is categorized as Financials Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GPZ and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs -0.42), 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.