WEAT vs. GMAR
WEAT (Teucrium Wheat Fund) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - WEAT is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Teucrium Wheat Fund Benchmark, while GMAR is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest. WEAT is passively managed, while GMAR is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, WEAT returned -10.48%/yr vs 12.24%/yr for GMAR. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. WEAT charges 1.91%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GMAR.
Performance
WEAT vs. GMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, WEAT achieves a 13.52% return, which is significantly higher than GMAR's 7.89% return.
WEAT
- 1D
- -2.07%
- 1M
- -6.32%
- YTD
- 13.52%
- 6M
- 8.73%
- 1Y
- -0.35%
- 3Y*
- -10.48%
- 5Y*
- -7.95%
- 10Y*
- -6.84%
GMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 1.52%
- YTD
- 7.89%
- 6M
- 8.66%
- 1Y
- 15.30%
- 3Y*
- 12.24%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
WEAT vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
WEAT Teucrium Wheat Fund | 13.52% | -17.14% | -19.26% | -15.20% |
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 7.89% | 9.29% | 12.14% | 11.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between WEAT and GMAR is -0.20, 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 | -0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2023 | -0.04 |
The correlation between WEAT and GMAR shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to -0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
WEAT vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank
WEAT
GMAR
WEAT vs. GMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Wheat Fund (WEAT) 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.
| WEAT | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.96 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 2.02 | -1.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.02 | 8.56 | -8.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.03 | 59.52 | -59.55 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| WEAT | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.02 | 3.94 | -3.96 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.41 | 1.91 | -2.33 |
Drawdowns
WEAT vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum WEAT drawdown since its inception was -84.32%, which is greater than GMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WEAT and GMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| WEAT | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.32% | -9.11% | -75.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.85% | -1.79% | -16.06% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.27% | -9.11% | -37.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -67.83% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.83% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -82.12% | -0.10% | -82.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -63.12% | -0.54% | -62.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.29% | 0.26% | +11.03% |
Volatility
WEAT vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison
Teucrium Wheat Fund (WEAT) has a higher volatility of 10.00% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) at 0.69%. This indicates that WEAT'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
| WEAT | GMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.00% | 0.69% | +9.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.05% | 2.99% | +15.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.62% | 3.90% | +18.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.51% | 6.84% | +23.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.80% | 6.84% | +19.96% |
WEAT vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
WEAT has a 1.91% expense ratio, which is higher than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
WEAT vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither WEAT nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
WEAT and GMAR have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
WEAT has higher volatility (10.00%) compared to GMAR (0.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WEAT dropped -84.32% vs GMAR's -9.11%.
On 3-year performance, GMAR leads with 12.24% vs -10.48% for WEAT. On fees, GMAR is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, GMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GMAR has performed better with a 12.24% return vs -10.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GMAR is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.91% for WEAT.
WEAT and GMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
WEAT is categorized as Agricultural Commodities, while GMAR is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 1.91% for WEAT and 0.85% for GMAR.
GMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.94 vs -0.02), 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 WEAT 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