IPAY vs. GGTL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

IPAY (ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF) and GGTL (Gabelli Global Technology Leaders ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. IPAY is passively managed, while GGTL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IPAY returned 3.07%/yr vs 21.46%/yr for GGTL. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IPAY charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for GGTL.

Performance

IPAY vs. GGTL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) and Gabelli Global Technology Leaders ETF (GGTL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAY achieves a -13.98% return, which is significantly lower than GGTL's 23.84% return.

IPAY

• 1D: 2.55%
• 1M: -1.05%
• YTD: -13.98%
• 6M: -15.52%
• 1Y: -24.10%
• 3Y*: 3.07%
• 5Y*: -8.73%
• 10Y*: 7.04%

GGTL

• 1D: -4.64%
• 1M: 2.58%
• YTD: 23.84%
• 6M: 23.84%
• 1Y: 40.67%
• 3Y*: 21.46%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IPAY vs. GGTL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IPAY ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF	-13.98%	-9.55%	25.88%	18.21%	-33.19%
GGTL Gabelli Global Technology Leaders ETF	23.84%	19.78%	11.07%	18.17%	-16.10%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAY and GGTL is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2022	0.74

Over the past year, the correlation between IPAY and GGTL has dropped to 0.45 - well below their long-term average of 0.74, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IPAY vs. GGTL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IPAY	GGTL
Technology	53.9%	55.5%
Financial Services	41.8%	-
Industrials	4.3%	0.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	2.9%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

IPAY vs. GGTL — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAY

IPAY Risk / Return Rank: 2
IPAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
IPAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
IPAY Omega Ratio Rank: 2
IPAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
IPAY Martin Ratio Rank: 2

GGTL

GGTL Risk / Return Rank: 76
GGTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
GGTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
GGTL Omega Ratio Rank: 73
GGTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
GGTL Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

IPAY vs. GGTL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) and Gabelli Global Technology Leaders ETF (GGTL). 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.

	IPAY	GGTL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.02	2.10	-3.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.31	2.75	-4.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	1.39	-0.55
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.77	4.44	-5.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.38	15.15	-16.52

IPAY vs. GGTL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAY Sharpe Ratio is -1.02, which is lower than the GGTL Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAY and GGTL, 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

IPAY vs. GGTL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAY drawdown since its inception was -51.75%, which is greater than GGTL's maximum drawdown of -23.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAY and GGTL.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPAY	GGTL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.75%	-23.65%	-28.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.31%	-9.20%	-22.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.74%	-21.46%	-11.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.49%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.72%	-4.64%	-33.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.78%	-7.40%	-9.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.54%	2.69%	+14.85%

Volatility

IPAY vs. GGTL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) is 8.33%, while Gabelli Global Technology Leaders ETF (GGTL) has a volatility of 11.18%. This indicates that IPAY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GGTL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IPAY	GGTL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.33%	11.18%	-2.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.96%	16.84%	+2.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.99%	19.45%	+4.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.17%	18.19%	+7.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.40%	18.19%	+7.21%

IPAY vs. GGTL - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAY has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than GGTL's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

IPAY vs. GGTL - Dividend Comparison

IPAY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, more than GGTL's 0.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GGTL Gabelli Global Technology Leaders ETF	0.84%	1.04%	0.75%	0.84%	0.78%
IPAY ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF	0.92%	0.79%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IPAY and GGTL in my portfolio?

IPAY and GGTL have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPAY or GGTL?

GGTL has higher volatility (11.18%) compared to IPAY (8.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAY dropped -51.75% vs GGTL's -23.65%.

Which ETF is better, IPAY or GGTL?

On 3-year performance, GGTL leads with 21.46% vs 3.07% for IPAY. On fees, IPAY is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, IPAY has been the lower-risk option at 8.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPAY or GGTL?

Over the 3-year period, GGTL has performed better with a 21.46% return vs 3.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPAY or GGTL?

IPAY is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for GGTL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IPAY or GGTL?

IPAY has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.84% for GGTL.

What is the main difference between IPAY and GGTL?

They also come from different issuers: ETFMG and Gabelli. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for IPAY and 0.90% for GGTL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GGTL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs -1.02), 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.