PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HFGM vs. GDMA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HFGM vs. GDMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) and Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HFGM achieves a 14.95% return, which is significantly higher than GDMA's 11.18% return.


HFGM

1D
-1.51%
1M
-0.10%
YTD
14.95%
6M
14.19%
1Y
39.23%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GDMA

1D
0.30%
1M
1.83%
YTD
11.18%
6M
14.08%
1Y
32.26%
3Y*
16.91%
5Y*
7.66%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HFGM vs. GDMA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
HFGM
Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF
14.95%26.63%
GDMA
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF
11.18%26.67%

Correlation

The correlation between HFGM and GDMA is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2025

0.62

The correlation between HFGM and GDMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

HFGM vs. GDMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

HFGM
HFGM Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
HFGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HFGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
HFGM Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
HFGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
HFGM Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

GDMA
GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
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. GDMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) and Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA). 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.


HFGMGDMADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.47

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.70

4.30

-0.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.95

11.92

-1.97

HFGM vs. GDMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HFGM Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the GDMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HFGM and GDMA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


HFGMGDMADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

2.47

-0.72

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.82

0.89

+0.93

Drawdowns

HFGM vs. GDMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HFGM drawdown since its inception was -10.66%, smaller than the maximum GDMA drawdown of -16.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFGM and GDMA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HFGMGDMADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.66%

-16.66%

+6.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.66%

-7.53%

-3.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.28%

-1.06%

-4.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.68%

-3.78%

+1.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.95%

2.71%

+1.24%

Volatility

HFGM vs. GDMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) is 4.40%, while Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a volatility of 6.18%. This indicates that HFGM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HFGMGDMADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.40%

6.18%

-1.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.41%

10.03%

+7.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.55%

13.12%

+9.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.75%

9.67%

+12.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.75%

10.97%

+10.78%

HFGM vs. GDMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

HFGM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than GDMA's 0.77% expense ratio.


Dividends

HFGM vs. GDMA - Dividend Comparison

HFGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.77%, more than GDMA's 2.51% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
GDMA
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF
2.51%2.79%2.32%4.14%1.18%2.10%0.62%3.17%
HFGM
Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF
9.77%11.23%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


HFGM and GDMA have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to HFGM (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HFGM dropped -10.66% vs GDMA's -16.66%.

On 1-year performance, HFGM leads with 39.23% vs 32.26% for GDMA. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, HFGM has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, HFGM has performed better with a 39.23% return vs 32.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for HFGM.

HFGM has the higher dividend yield at 9.77%, compared with 2.51% for GDMA.

HFGM is categorized as Macro Trading, while GDMA is Hedge Fund. They also come from different issuers: Unlimited and Gadsden. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for HFGM and 0.77% for GDMA.

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.75), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HFGM and GDMA

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