Screener
KONG vs GLOF
Formidable Fortress ETF vs iShares Global Equity Factor ETF
Key differences
- GLOF costs 0.69% less per year.
- GLOF is significantly larger than KONG — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- KONG is classified as alternative, while GLOF is equity — different risk/return profiles.
- KONG follows a option income strategy; GLOF uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, GLOF has delivered higher annualized returns.
- GLOF has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| KONG | GLOF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.89% | 0.20% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $22M | $196M |
| Since | 2021 | 2015 |
| Dividend yield | 0.36% | 1.57% |
| Asset class | alternative | equity |
| Region | — | — |
| Strategy | option income | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +6.2% | +30.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | +9.3% | +22.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +11.7% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.49 | 1.26 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.91% | 12.58% |
| Max drawdown | -19.98% | -34.12% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to KONG and GLOF
Explore further