TBFG vs. GMOD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and GMOD (GMO Dynamic Allocation ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for GMOD.

Performance

TBFG vs. GMOD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and GMO Dynamic Allocation ETF (GMOD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 8.68% return, which is significantly higher than GMOD's 6.36% return.

TBFG

• 1D: -1.55%
• 1M: 0.04%
• YTD: 8.68%
• 6M: 8.23%
• 1Y: 21.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMOD

• 1D: -0.88%
• 1M: -0.00%
• YTD: 6.36%
• 6M: 6.27%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TBFG vs. GMOD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	8.68%	2.94%
GMOD GMO Dynamic Allocation ETF	6.36%	4.35%

Correlation

The correlation between TBFG and GMOD is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.93

Return for Risk

TBFG vs. GMOD — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBFG

TBFG Risk / Return Rank: 67
TBFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
TBFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
TBFG Omega Ratio Rank: 70
TBFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
TBFG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

GMOD

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

TBFG vs. GMOD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and GMO Dynamic Allocation ETF (GMOD). 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.

	TBFG	GMOD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.81	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.85	—	—

Drawdowns

TBFG vs. GMOD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, which is greater than GMOD's maximum drawdown of -6.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and GMOD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBFG	GMOD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-6.50%	-6.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.87%	-1.51%	-0.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.62%	-1.13%	-0.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TBFG	GMOD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.66%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.00%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.55%	9.07%	+1.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.18%	9.07%	+2.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.18%	9.07%	+2.11%

TBFG vs. GMOD - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than GMOD's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBFG vs. GMOD - Dividend Comparison

TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.39%, more than GMOD's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GMOD GMO Dynamic Allocation ETF	0.88%	0.93%	0.00%
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	2.39%	2.65%	2.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBFG and GMOD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, TBFG and GMOD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, TBFG or GMOD?

On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBFG or GMOD?

TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for GMOD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TBFG or GMOD?

TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.39%, compared with 0.88% for GMOD.

What is the main difference between TBFG and GMOD?

They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and GMO. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 0.50% for GMOD.