GMAR vs VOO
FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GMAR | VOO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $395M | $979.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 5 | 509 | |
| YTD Return | +9.70% | +13.72% | |
| 1Y Return | +13.44% | +21.63% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.05% | +21.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.26% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.9% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -9.1% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 17, 2023 | Sep 7, 2010 |
GMAR vs VOO Performance
FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GMAR returned +13.44% while VOO returned +21.63%. Year to date, GMAR is up 9.70% versus a gain of 13.72% for VOO.
Over three years, GMAR compounded at +12.05% per year against +21.55% for VOO. Across the full 3-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.56% annualized vs +12.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VOO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.1% compared with 4.9% for GMAR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -9.1% for GMAR and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GMAR charges 0.85% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GMAR currently yields 0.00% against 1.09% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
GMAR and VOO share 0 holdings out of 506 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GMAR or VOO?
GMAR has an expense ratio of 0.85% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $82 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GMAR or VOO?
Over the past year GMAR returned +13.44% vs +21.63% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), GMAR annualized +12.80% vs +13.56% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GMAR or VOO?
VOO has been the more volatile fund at 14.1% annualized versus 4.9% for GMAR. Worst drawdown: GMAR -9.1% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both GMAR and VOO?
GMAR and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between GMAR and VOO?
GMAR and VOO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GMAR or VOO?
GMAR yields 0.00% while VOO yields 1.09%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.