HFGM vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

HFGM (Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HFGM is a Macro Trading fund actively managed by Unlimited, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, HFGM returned 31.50% vs 1.79% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. HFGM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

HFGM vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) 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, HFGM achieves a 10.94% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.74% return.

HFGM

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: -7.19%
• YTD: 10.94%
• 6M: 10.72%
• 1Y: 31.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.13%
• YTD: 0.74%
• 6M: 0.65%
• 1Y: 1.79%
• 3Y*: 4.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HFGM vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF	10.94%	26.88%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.74%	0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between HFGM and CAOS is -0.18, 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	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2025	-0.16

Return for Risk

HFGM vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

HFGM

HFGM Risk / Return Rank: 49
HFGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
HFGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
HFGM Omega Ratio Rank: 44
HFGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
HFGM Martin Ratio Rank: 50

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 43
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 42
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

HFGM vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) 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.

	HFGM	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.38	1.18	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	1.87	+0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.24	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.88	2.37	+0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.47	5.80	+1.67

HFGM vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HFGM Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is comparable to the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HFGM 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

HFGM vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HFGM drawdown since its inception was -10.97%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFGM and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	HFGM	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.97%	-3.89%	-7.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.97%	-0.76%	-10.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.59%	-1.15%	-7.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-0.91%	-1.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.24%	0.31%	+3.93%

Volatility

HFGM vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) has a higher volatility of 5.17% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.32%. This indicates that HFGM'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

	HFGM	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.17%	0.32%	+4.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.78%	1.04%	+16.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.89%	1.53%	+21.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.78%	4.25%	+17.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.78%	4.25%	+17.53%

HFGM vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

HFGM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

HFGM vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

HFGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.13%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF	10.13%	11.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HFGM and CAOS in my portfolio?

HFGM and CAOS have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HFGM or CAOS?

HFGM has higher volatility (5.17%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HFGM dropped -10.97% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, HFGM or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, HFGM leads with 31.50% vs 1.79% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% 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, HFGM or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, HFGM has performed better with a 31.50% return vs 1.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HFGM or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for HFGM.

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

HFGM has the higher dividend yield at 10.13%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between HFGM and CAOS?

HFGM is categorized as Macro Trading, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Unlimited and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for HFGM and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HFGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.18), 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.