AAUB vs. GSLC
AAUB (Alpha Architect U.S. Equity 4 ETF) and GSLC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. AAUB is actively managed, while GSLC is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. AAUB charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for GSLC.
Performance
AAUB vs. GSLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
AAUB
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- —
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
GSLC
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 2.91%
- 6M
- 11.66%
- YTD
- 11.56%
- 1Y
- 20.26%
- 3Y*
- 20.03%
- 5Y*
- 11.96%
- 10Y*
- 14.48%
- ALL TIME*
- 14.29%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $529.43K | $529.43K | $529.43K | |
| $28.07M | $49.12M | $41.41M |
AAUB vs. GSLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
AAUB Alpha Architect U.S. Equity 4 ETF | 3.59% |
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 3.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAUB and GSLC is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2026 | 0.81 |
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
AAUB vs. GSLC — Risk / Return Rank
AAUB
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GSLC
AAUB vs. GSLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect U.S. Equity 4 ETF (AAUB) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC). 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.
| AAUB | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.29 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.14 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 9.05 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AAUB vs. GSLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAUB drawdown since its inception was -2.77%, smaller than the maximum GSLC drawdown of -33.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAUB and GSLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAUB | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.77% | -33.69% | +30.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.90% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.30% | -0.14% | -0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.53% | -4.35% | +3.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.24% | — |
Volatility
AAUB vs. GSLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAUB | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.62% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 9.83% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.54% | 12.41% | +9.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.54% | 16.74% | +4.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.54% | 17.70% | +3.84% |
AAUB vs. GSLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAUB has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is higher than GSLC's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
AAUB vs. GSLC - Dividend Comparison
AAUB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GSLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAUB Alpha Architect U.S. Equity 4 ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 0.91% | 1.00% | 1.11% | 1.38% | 1.61% | 1.06% | 1.35% | 1.54% | 1.89% | 1.69% | 1.69% | 0.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAUB and GSLC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GSLC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.09% for AAUB.
GSLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.00% for AAUB.
They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for AAUB and 0.09% for GSLC.
Find the right allocation for AAUB and GSLC
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