AAPW vs. GSG
AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - AAPW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. AAPW is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, AAPW returned 54.84% vs 38.52% for GSG. Their -0.07 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. AAPW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
AAPW vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AAPW achieves a 11.02% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 35.21% return.
AAPW
- 1D
- -2.28%
- 1M
- -2.47%
- 6M
- 12.40%
- YTD
- 11.02%
- 1Y
- 54.84%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.83%
GSG
- 1D
- -2.68%
- 1M
- 9.90%
- 6M
- 27.47%
- YTD
- 35.21%
- 1Y
- 38.52%
- 3Y*
- 13.26%
- 5Y*
- 14.69%
- 10Y*
- 8.24%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.27%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $952.50K | $777.94K | $708.97K | |
| $17.98M | $16.40M | $25.53M |
AAPW vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 11.02% | 8.71% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 35.21% | 0.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAPW and GSG is -0.21, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025 | -0.07 |
The correlation between AAPW and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.21 (1 year) to -0.07 (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
AAPW vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
AAPW
GSG
AAPW vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
| AAPW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.28 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.17 | 2.06 | +1.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.52 | 6.61 | +0.91 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AAPW vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAPW drawdown since its inception was -36.28%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAPW and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAPW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.28% | -89.62% | +53.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.36% | -18.81% | +1.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.81% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.04% | -59.18% | +46.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.45% | -63.67% | +53.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.32% | 5.85% | +1.47% |
Volatility
AAPW vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a higher volatility of 13.12% compared to iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) at 8.75%. This indicates that AAPW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAPW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.12% | 8.75% | +4.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.92% | 22.27% | +2.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.52% | 24.37% | +7.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.69% | 22.89% | +12.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.69% | 22.07% | +13.62% |
AAPW vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAPW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
AAPW vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
AAPW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 31.96%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 31.96% | 28.83% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAPW and GSG have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAPW has higher volatility (13.12%) compared to GSG (8.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAPW dropped -36.28% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 54.84% vs 38.52% for GSG. On fees, GSG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, GSG has been the lower-risk option at 8.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 54.84% return vs 38.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AAPW.
AAPW has the higher dividend yield at 31.96%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
AAPW is categorized as Derivative Income, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AAPW and 0.75% for GSG.
AAPW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.59), 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 AAPW and GSG
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