KLMT vs. GVAL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

KLMT (Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF) and GVAL (Cambria Global Value ETF) are both Global Equities funds. KLMT is passively managed, while GVAL is actively managed. Over the past year, KLMT returned 23.15% vs 39.29% for GVAL. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KLMT charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.64%/yr for GVAL.

Performance

KLMT vs. GVAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KLMT achieves a 10.09% return, which is significantly lower than GVAL's 15.95% return.

KLMT

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 10.09%
• 6M: 9.12%
• 1Y: 23.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GVAL

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: 2.99%
• YTD: 15.95%
• 6M: 15.40%
• 1Y: 39.29%
• 3Y*: 26.91%
• 5Y*: 13.95%
• 10Y*: 11.68%

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

KLMT vs. GVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	10.09%	21.31%	4.94%
GVAL Cambria Global Value ETF	15.95%	55.87%	-0.33%

Correlation

The correlation between KLMT and GVAL is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2024	0.67

The correlation between KLMT and GVAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

KLMT vs. GVAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KLMT	GVAL
Technology	33.8%	9.4%
Financial Services	16.2%	16.9%
Industrials	9.9%	3.6%
Communication Services	8.6%	4.3%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	2.7%
Healthcare	7.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	1.8%
Energy	3.2%	6.8%
Basic Materials	2.7%	7.7%
Real Estate	2.6%	6.2%
Utilities	1.8%	3.7%

Return for Risk

KLMT vs. GVAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

KLMT

KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 60
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 59
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 65

GVAL

GVAL Risk / Return Rank: 81
GVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
GVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
GVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 84
GVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
GVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

KLMT vs. GVAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL). 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.

	KLMT	GVAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	2.54	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	3.39	-0.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.45	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.44	3.43	-0.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.30	13.04	-2.74

KLMT vs. GVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KLMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is lower than the GVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KLMT and GVAL, 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

KLMT vs. GVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KLMT drawdown since its inception was -16.87%, smaller than the maximum GVAL drawdown of -46.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KLMT and GVAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	KLMT	GVAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.87%	-46.82%	+29.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	-11.50%	+1.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.72%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-30.83%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.50%	-3.51%	+1.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-13.82%	+11.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.25%	3.02%	-0.77%

Volatility

KLMT vs. GVAL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) is 5.41%, while Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) has a volatility of 6.52%. This indicates that KLMT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GVAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KLMT	GVAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.41%	6.52%	-1.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.08%	13.85%	-2.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.38%	15.62%	-2.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.02%	18.60%	-2.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.02%	19.01%	-2.99%

KLMT vs. GVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

KLMT has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than GVAL's 0.64% expense ratio.

Dividends

KLMT vs. GVAL - Dividend Comparison

KLMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, less than GVAL's 2.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GVAL Cambria Global Value ETF	2.46%	2.93%	4.75%	6.12%	5.05%	2.97%	1.90%	2.84%	4.65%	2.00%	2.54%	2.11%
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	1.79%	1.95%	0.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KLMT and GVAL in my portfolio?

KLMT and GVAL have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KLMT or GVAL?

GVAL has higher volatility (6.52%) compared to KLMT (5.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KLMT dropped -16.87% vs GVAL's -46.82%.

Which ETF is better, KLMT or GVAL?

On 1-year performance, GVAL leads with 39.29% vs 23.15% for KLMT. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, KLMT has been the lower-risk option at 5.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KLMT or GVAL?

Over the 1-year period, GVAL has performed better with a 39.29% return vs 23.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KLMT or GVAL?

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for GVAL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KLMT or GVAL?

GVAL has the higher dividend yield at 2.46%, compared with 1.79% for KLMT.

What is the main difference between KLMT and GVAL?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for KLMT and 0.64% for GVAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 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.