SHRT vs. GVLU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SHRT (Gotham Short Strategies ETF) and GVLU (Gotham 1000 Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SHRT is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by Gotham, while GVLU is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Gotham. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SHRT returned -21.72% vs 18.56% for GVLU. At a correlation of -0.35, they often move in opposite directions. SHRT charges 1.35%/yr vs 0.51%/yr for GVLU.

Performance

SHRT vs. GVLU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT) and Gotham 1000 Value ETF (GVLU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SHRT achieves a -17.20% return, which is significantly lower than GVLU's 6.95% return.

SHRT

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: -4.10%
• YTD: -17.20%
• 6M: -15.30%
• 1Y: -21.72%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GVLU

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 1.02%
• YTD: 6.95%
• 6M: 7.83%
• 1Y: 18.56%
• 3Y*: 15.80%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SHRT vs. GVLU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SHRT Gotham Short Strategies ETF	-17.20%	-0.91%	-1.44%	-5.83%
GVLU Gotham 1000 Value ETF	6.95%	11.24%	11.09%	11.82%

Correlation

The correlation between SHRT and GVLU is -0.24, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023	-0.35

The correlation between SHRT and GVLU shifts across timeframes, from -0.35 (all time) to -0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SHRT vs. GVLU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SHRT	GVLU
Technology	26.3%	14.5%
Industrials	19.2%	11.2%
Basic Materials	13.8%	5.2%
Healthcare	13.6%	10.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	16.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	10.3%
Energy	6.9%	11.4%
Communication Services	1.6%	3.7%
Financial Services	0.6%	15.9%
Utilities	0.0%	0.4%
Real Estate	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

SHRT vs. GVLU — Risk / Return Rank

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

SHRT

SHRT Risk / Return Rank: 0
SHRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
SHRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
SHRT Omega Ratio Rank: 0
SHRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
SHRT Martin Ratio Rank: 0

GVLU

GVLU Risk / Return Rank: 42
GVLU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
GVLU Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
GVLU Omega Ratio Rank: 36
GVLU Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GVLU Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

SHRT vs. GVLU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT) and Gotham 1000 Value ETF (GVLU). 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.

	SHRT	GVLU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.67	1.39	-3.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.47	2.16	-4.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.74	1.24	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.96	2.29	-3.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-2.09	7.40	-9.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SHRT vs. GVLU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SHRT Sharpe Ratio is -1.67, which is lower than the GVLU Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SHRT and GVLU, 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

	SHRT	GVLU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.67	1.39	-3.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.79	0.61	-1.40

Drawdowns

SHRT vs. GVLU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SHRT drawdown since its inception was -25.98%, which is greater than GVLU's maximum drawdown of -20.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SHRT and GVLU.

Drawdown Indicators

	SHRT	GVLU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.98%	-20.82%	-5.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.73%	-8.14%	-14.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.74%	-1.57%	-24.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.12%	-4.16%	-3.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.40%	2.52%	+7.88%

Volatility

SHRT vs. GVLU - Volatility Comparison

Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT) has a higher volatility of 4.29% compared to Gotham 1000 Value ETF (GVLU) at 3.03%. This indicates that SHRT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GVLU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SHRT	GVLU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.29%	3.03%	+1.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.96%	9.04%	+1.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.04%	13.44%	-0.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.78%	17.79%	-5.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.78%	17.79%	-5.01%

SHRT vs. GVLU - Expense Ratio Comparison

SHRT has a 1.35% expense ratio, which is higher than GVLU's 0.51% expense ratio.

Dividends

SHRT vs. GVLU - Dividend Comparison

SHRT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, less than GVLU's 6.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GVLU Gotham 1000 Value ETF	6.02%	6.44%	2.88%	1.62%	0.98%
SHRT Gotham Short Strategies ETF	0.08%	0.07%	0.85%	0.27%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SHRT and GVLU in my portfolio?

SHRT and GVLU have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SHRT or GVLU?

SHRT has higher volatility (4.29%) compared to GVLU (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SHRT dropped -25.98% vs GVLU's -20.82%.

Which ETF is better, SHRT or GVLU?

On 1-year performance, GVLU leads with 18.56% vs -21.72% for SHRT. On fees, GVLU is cheaper at 0.51% per year. On volatility, GVLU has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SHRT or GVLU?

Over the 1-year period, GVLU has performed better with a 18.56% return vs -21.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SHRT or GVLU?

GVLU is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for SHRT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SHRT or GVLU?

GVLU has the higher dividend yield at 6.02%, compared with 0.08% for SHRT.

What is the main difference between SHRT and GVLU?

SHRT is categorized as Inverse Equities, while GVLU is Mid Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.35% for SHRT and 0.51% for GVLU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GVLU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs -1.67), 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.