GMOD ranks 2nd and MATR 9th of 46 funds in the Tactical Allocation Category.
GMOD vs MATR
GMOD −0.30pt a year
0.50%0.80%
GMOD 16.4×the volume
11.8K721
GMOD vs MATR Performance
+11.8%+4.1%
- GMOD 0.50%, better
- MATR 0.80%
- GMOD $49M
- MATR $10M
- GMOD +11.8%, better
- MATR +4.1%
- GMOD
- MATR 2.88%
- GMOD 20
- MATR 27
- GMOD 11.8K sh, better
- MATR 721 sh
- GMOD $27.77
- MATR $26.94
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | GMOD | MATR |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A90Higher | B69 |
| Mission | A74 | A80Higher |
| Risk | A75Higher | B55 |
| Tradability | A73Higher | C40 |
| Holdings | B64 | B69Higher |
| Durability | C49Higher | D35 |
Rank among Tactical Allocation funds
Same Category. GMOD and MATR are both graded against the same 46 Tactical Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
GMODA
MATRB
In short
GMOD GMO's 7-year asset class forecasts, finally wrapped in an ETF. It tilts toward what the firm's valuation models call cheap and away from what they call expensive, shifting between stocks, bonds and alternatives inside one ticker.
MATR Harbor's in-house macro team reads the business cycle, then sets the mix of stock, bond, commodity and currency ETFs to match it. A tactical allocation fund for investors who want the regime call outsourced, priced near the middle of its category.
Stated mandate
GMOD The Fund seeks positive total return. It allocates among asset classes using GMO's multi-year return forecasts and relative-risk assessments.
MATR The Fund seeks long-term total return while limiting downside risk. Its allocation is driven by regime modeling across multiple asset categories, including real estate investment trusts and commodities.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
GMOD vs MATR Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
GMOD vs MATR Cost
Overpaying MATR vs GMOD
$5,367
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
GMOD 0.50%
$9,979
MATR 0.80%
$15,346
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | GMOD | MATR | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $900 | $1,422 | $522 |
| 20 | $3,460 | $5,393 | $1,933 |
| 30 | $9,979 | $15,346 | $5,367 |
- 0.50%GMOD, cheaper
- 0.80%MATR
- Middle half of Tactical Allocation funds
- Median 0.93%
GMOD 6th cheapest of 46 funds
MATR 15th cheapest of 46 funds
GMOD vs MATR Dividends
- GMOD
- MATR 2.88%
- GMOD
- MATR $0.78
- GMOD $0.14
- MATR $0.78
- GMOD Jun 30, 2026
- MATR Dec 19, 2025
- GMOD Jul 1, 2026
- MATR Dec 24, 2025
- GMOD Twice a year
- MATR Annual
Distribution history
GMOD vs MATR Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- GMOD 8.7%MATR 8.7%Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
- Return per unit of risk
- GMOD 0.89MATR 1.17
- Worst fall
- GMOD −6.5%MATR −12.9%
- Market sensitivity
- GMOD 0.48MATR 0.62
Popular comparisons
- 0.50% · 0.22%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.80% · 0.22%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.50% · 0.60%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.80% · 0.60%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.50% · 0.72%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.80% · 0.72%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.