GUSA vs. FMAY

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GUSA (Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF) and FMAY (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - GUSA tracks the Solactive GBS United States 1000 Index - Benchmark TR Gross while FMAY tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index May Series. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GUSA returned 22.50%/yr vs 14.23%/yr for FMAY. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GUSA charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FMAY.

Performance

GUSA vs. FMAY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May (FMAY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GUSA achieves a 11.29% return, which is significantly higher than FMAY's 5.65% return.

GUSA

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: 4.73%
• YTD: 11.29%
• 6M: 11.21%
• 1Y: 28.15%
• 3Y*: 22.50%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FMAY

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 1.80%
• YTD: 5.65%
• 6M: 6.55%
• 1Y: 15.55%
• 3Y*: 14.23%
• 5Y*: 9.54%
• 10Y*: —

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

GUSA vs. FMAY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GUSA Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF	11.29%	17.51%	24.46%	26.61%	-12.69%
FMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May	5.65%	12.69%	14.45%	17.83%	-5.64%

Correlation

The correlation between GUSA and FMAY is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2022	0.95

The correlation between GUSA and FMAY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

GUSA vs. FMAY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GUSA	FMAY
Technology	34.0%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.6%	11.9%
Communication Services	11.1%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	10.1%
Industrials	9.4%	8.1%
Healthcare	8.8%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	4.9%
Energy	3.6%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	2.2%	1.9%
Basic Materials	2.0%	1.8%

Return for Risk

GUSA vs. FMAY — Risk / Return Rank

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

GUSA

GUSA Risk / Return Rank: 71
GUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
GUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
GUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 71
GUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
GUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 76

FMAY

FMAY Risk / Return Rank: 84
FMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
FMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
FMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

GUSA vs. FMAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May (FMAY). 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.

	GUSA	FMAY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	2.59	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.17	3.84	-0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.54	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.14	3.70	-0.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.45	21.75	-7.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GUSA vs. FMAY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GUSA Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is comparable to the FMAY Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GUSA and FMAY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GUSA	FMAY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.32	2.59	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.91	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	1.03	-0.14

Drawdowns

GUSA vs. FMAY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GUSA drawdown since its inception was -19.61%, which is greater than FMAY's maximum drawdown of -13.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GUSA and FMAY.

Drawdown Indicators

	GUSA	FMAY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.61%	-13.60%	-6.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.01%	-4.22%	-4.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.61%	-13.12%	-6.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-13.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.22%	-0.13%	-0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.38%	-2.01%	-2.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.95%	0.72%	+1.23%

Volatility

GUSA vs. FMAY - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) has a higher volatility of 3.03% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May (FMAY) at 1.03%. This indicates that GUSA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GUSA	FMAY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.03%	1.03%	+2.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.29%	4.59%	+4.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.20%	6.04%	+6.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.26%	10.59%	+6.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.26%	10.14%	+7.12%

GUSA vs. FMAY - Expense Ratio Comparison

GUSA has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than FMAY's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

GUSA vs. FMAY - Dividend Comparison

GUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, while FMAY has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
FMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - May	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GUSA Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF	0.96%	0.99%	1.16%	1.36%	1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GUSA and FMAY in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, GUSA and FMAY move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GUSA or FMAY?

GUSA has higher volatility (3.03%) compared to FMAY (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GUSA dropped -19.61% vs FMAY's -13.60%.

Which ETF is better, GUSA or FMAY?

On 3-year performance, GUSA leads with 22.50% vs 14.23% for FMAY. On fees, GUSA is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, FMAY has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GUSA or FMAY?

Over the 3-year period, GUSA has performed better with a 22.50% return vs 14.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GUSA or FMAY?

GUSA is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FMAY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GUSA or FMAY?

GUSA has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.00% for FMAY.

What is the main difference between GUSA and FMAY?

GUSA tracks Solactive GBS United States 1000 Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while FMAY tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index May Series. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for GUSA and 0.85% for FMAY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.32), 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.