PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LSAT vs. GMMF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LSAT vs. GMMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF (LSAT) and iShares Government Money Market ETF (GMMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LSAT achieves a 10.11% return, which is significantly higher than GMMF's 1.47% return.


LSAT

1D
-0.59%
1M
2.09%
YTD
10.11%
6M
8.58%
1Y
10.20%
3Y*
11.66%
5Y*
5.78%
10Y*

GMMF

1D
0.02%
1M
0.28%
YTD
1.47%
6M
1.75%
1Y
3.87%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LSAT vs. GMMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LSAT and GMMF is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025

-0.03

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

LSAT vs. GMMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

LSAT
LSAT Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
LSAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LSAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
LSAT Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
LSAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
LSAT Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

GMMF
GMMF Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
GMMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMMF Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
GMMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMMF Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

LSAT vs. GMMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF (LSAT) and iShares Government Money Market ETF (GMMF). 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.


LSATGMMFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.81

17.52

-16.71

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.27

86.57

-85.30

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

24.81

-23.67

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.29

129.87

-128.58

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.03

1,318.32

-1,315.29

LSAT vs. GMMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LSAT Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the GMMF Sharpe Ratio of 17.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LSAT and GMMF, 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


LSATGMMFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.81

17.52

-16.71

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.73

16.34

-15.61

Drawdowns

LSAT vs. GMMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LSAT drawdown since its inception was -20.48%, which is greater than GMMF's maximum drawdown of -0.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSAT and GMMF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LSATGMMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.48%

-0.03%

-20.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.94%

-0.03%

-7.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.59%

0.00%

-0.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.55%

-0.00%

-5.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.37%

0.00%

+3.37%

Volatility

LSAT vs. GMMF - Volatility Comparison

Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF (LSAT) has a higher volatility of 3.26% compared to iShares Government Money Market ETF (GMMF) at 0.06%. This indicates that LSAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LSATGMMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.26%

0.06%

+3.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.11%

0.14%

+8.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.59%

0.22%

+12.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.25%

0.24%

+16.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.76%

0.24%

+16.52%

LSAT vs. GMMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

LSAT has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than GMMF's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

LSAT vs. GMMF - Dividend Comparison

LSAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, less than GMMF's 3.67% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
GMMF
iShares Government Money Market ETF
3.67%3.45%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LSAT
Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF
1.72%1.90%1.31%1.85%0.36%3.44%0.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


LSAT and GMMF have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LSAT has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to GMMF (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LSAT dropped -20.48% vs GMMF's -0.03%.

On 1-year performance, LSAT leads with 10.20% vs 3.87% for GMMF. On fees, GMMF is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, GMMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LSAT has performed better with a 10.20% return vs 3.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GMMF is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for LSAT.

GMMF has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 1.72% for LSAT.

They also come from different issuers: Redwood and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for LSAT and 0.20% for GMMF.

GMMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.52 vs 0.81), 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 LSAT and GMMF

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