LTTI vs. GMAR
LTTI (FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - LTTI is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by FT Vest, while GMAR is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LTTI returned -2.61% vs 13.72% for GMAR. Their 0.17 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. LTTI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GMAR.
Performance
LTTI vs. GMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LTTI achieves a -4.10% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 8.83% return.
LTTI
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- -3.51%
- 6M
- -4.04%
- YTD
- -4.10%
- 1Y
- -2.61%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -1.21%
GMAR
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 0.60%
- 6M
- 8.30%
- YTD
- 8.83%
- 1Y
- 13.72%
- 3Y*
- 11.56%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 12.79%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $312.58K | $289.05K | $445.17K | |
| $120.18K | $116.89K | $129.92K |
LTTI vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LTTI FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF | -4.10% | 2.43% |
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 8.83% | 7.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between LTTI and GMAR is 0.21, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025 | 0.17 |
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
LTTI vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank
LTTI
GMAR
LTTI vs. GMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF (LTTI) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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.
| LTTI | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.81 | -0.83 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 7.44 | -7.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.39 | 45.84 | -46.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LTTI vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LTTI drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, roughly equal to the maximum GMAR drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LTTI and GMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LTTI | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.02% | -9.11% | +0.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.63% | -1.79% | -5.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.11% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.63% | 0.00% | -7.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -0.53% | -3.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.44% | 0.29% | +3.15% |
Volatility
LTTI vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF (LTTI) has a higher volatility of 2.24% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) at 1.22%. This indicates that LTTI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LTTI | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.24% | 1.22% | +1.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.27% | 3.44% | +2.83% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.45% | 4.01% | +4.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.05% | 6.75% | +3.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.05% | 6.75% | +3.30% |
LTTI vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
LTTI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
LTTI vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison
LTTI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.55%, while GMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LTTI FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF | 8.74% | 7.08% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LTTI and GMAR have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LTTI has higher volatility (2.24%) compared to GMAR (1.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LTTI dropped -9.02% vs GMAR's -9.11%.
On 1-year performance, GMAR leads with 13.72% vs -2.61% for LTTI. On fees, LTTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, GMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GMAR has performed better with a 13.72% return vs -2.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LTTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GMAR.
LTTI has the higher dividend yield at 8.74%, compared with 0.00% for GMAR.
LTTI is categorized as Derivative Income, while GMAR is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LTTI and 0.85% for GMAR.
GMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.33 vs -0.16), 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.
Find the right allocation for LTTI and GMAR
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