HFGM vs. MOOD

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

HFGM (Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF) and MOOD (Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HFGM is a Macro Trading fund actively managed by Unlimited, while MOOD is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by Relative Sentiment. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, HFGM returned 32.45% vs 33.33% for MOOD. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HFGM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MOOD.

Performance

HFGM vs. MOOD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) and Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HFGM achieves a 10.23% return, which is significantly lower than MOOD's 12.64% return.

HFGM

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: -5.52%
• YTD: 10.23%
• 6M: 11.02%
• 1Y: 32.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MOOD

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: -0.30%
• YTD: 12.64%
• 6M: 14.97%
• 1Y: 33.33%
• 3Y*: 19.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HFGM vs. MOOD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF	10.23%	26.63%
MOOD Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF	12.64%	25.19%

Correlation

The correlation between HFGM and MOOD is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2025	0.76

The correlation between HFGM and MOOD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

HFGM vs. MOOD — Risk / Return Rank

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

HFGM

HFGM Risk / Return Rank: 51
HFGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
HFGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
HFGM Omega Ratio Rank: 45
HFGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
HFGM Martin Ratio Rank: 52

MOOD

MOOD Risk / Return Rank: 74
MOOD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MOOD Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
MOOD Omega Ratio Rank: 84
MOOD Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MOOD Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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. MOOD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) and Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD). 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.

	HFGM	MOOD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	2.34	-0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	2.76	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.46	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	3.45	-0.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.03	10.67	-2.64
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HFGM vs. MOOD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HFGM Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the MOOD Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HFGM and MOOD, 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

	HFGM	MOOD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	2.34	-0.91
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.56	1.31	+0.25

Drawdowns

HFGM vs. MOOD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HFGM drawdown since its inception was -10.66%, smaller than the maximum MOOD drawdown of -14.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFGM and MOOD.

Drawdown Indicators

	HFGM	MOOD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.66%	-14.34%	+3.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.66%	-9.71%	-0.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.17%	-2.14%	-7.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.74%	-2.32%	-0.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.05%	3.13%	+0.92%

Volatility

HFGM vs. MOOD - Volatility Comparison

Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) has a higher volatility of 5.01% compared to Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD) at 3.59%. This indicates that HFGM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MOOD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HFGM	MOOD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.01%	3.59%	+1.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.65%	12.55%	+5.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.82%	14.33%	+8.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.85%	12.10%	+9.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.85%	12.10%	+9.75%

HFGM vs. MOOD - Expense Ratio Comparison

HFGM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than MOOD's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

HFGM vs. MOOD - Dividend Comparison

HFGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.19%, more than MOOD's 0.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF	10.19%	11.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MOOD Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF	0.36%	0.40%	1.33%	1.34%	1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HFGM and MOOD in my portfolio?

HFGM and MOOD have a correlation of 0.77, 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 MOOD?

HFGM has higher volatility (5.01%) compared to MOOD (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HFGM dropped -10.66% vs MOOD's -14.34%.

Which ETF is better, HFGM or MOOD?

On 1-year performance, MOOD leads with 33.33% vs 32.45% for HFGM. On fees, MOOD is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, MOOD has been the lower-risk option at 3.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HFGM or MOOD?

Over the 1-year period, MOOD has performed better with a 33.33% return vs 32.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HFGM or MOOD?

MOOD is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for HFGM.

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

HFGM has the higher dividend yield at 10.19%, compared with 0.36% for MOOD.

What is the main difference between HFGM and MOOD?

HFGM is categorized as Macro Trading, while MOOD is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Unlimited and Relative Sentiment. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for HFGM and 0.68% for MOOD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MOOD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.43), 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.