AIFD vs. GINN

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

AIFD (TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF) and GINN (Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. AIFD is actively managed, while GINN is passively managed. Over the past year, AIFD returned 104.68% vs 25.65% for GINN. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AIFD charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for GINN.

Performance

AIFD vs. GINN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF (AIFD) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIFD achieves a 52.46% return, which is significantly higher than GINN's 8.64% return.

AIFD

• 1D: 3.28%
• 1M: 20.62%
• YTD: 52.46%
• 6M: 53.64%
• 1Y: 104.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GINN

• 1D: -1.29%
• 1M: 5.38%
• YTD: 8.64%
• 6M: 7.90%
• 1Y: 25.65%
• 3Y*: 19.95%
• 5Y*: 6.82%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AIFD vs. GINN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AIFD TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF	52.46%	28.30%	14.65%
GINN Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF	8.64%	20.25%	11.99%

Correlation

The correlation between AIFD and GINN is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2024	0.79

The correlation between AIFD and GINN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIFD vs. GINN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIFD	GINN
Technology	71.1%	32.4%
Communication Services	11.0%	10.8%
Industrials	10.2%	6.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.1%	14.6%
Basic Materials	-	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.0%
Energy	-	1.4%
Financial Services	-	11.4%
Healthcare	-	18.6%
Real Estate	-	0.8%
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

AIFD vs. GINN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AIFD

AIFD Risk / Return Rank: 94
AIFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
AIFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
AIFD Omega Ratio Rank: 91
AIFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
AIFD Martin Ratio Rank: 96

GINN

GINN Risk / Return Rank: 44
GINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
GINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
GINN Omega Ratio Rank: 43
GINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
GINN Martin Ratio Rank: 44

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AIFD vs. GINN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF (AIFD) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). 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.

	AIFD	GINN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.13	1.61	+2.53
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.56	2.25	+2.30
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.62	1.28	+0.34
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.09	1.95	+7.13
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	38.58	7.06	+31.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AIFD vs. GINN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIFD Sharpe Ratio is 4.13, which is higher than the GINN Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIFD and GINN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AIFD	GINN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.13	1.61	+2.53
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.32	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.64	0.45	+1.19

Drawdowns

AIFD vs. GINN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIFD drawdown since its inception was -33.20%, smaller than the maximum GINN drawdown of -41.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIFD and GINN.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIFD	GINN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.20%	-41.25%	+8.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.75%	-13.18%	+1.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.25%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-41.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.63%	+1.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.73%	-13.37%	+7.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	3.64%	-0.87%

Volatility

AIFD vs. GINN - Volatility Comparison

TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF (AIFD) has a higher volatility of 8.66% compared to Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN) at 3.98%. This indicates that AIFD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GINN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIFD	GINN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.66%	3.98%	+4.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.75%	12.04%	+7.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.48%	16.06%	+9.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.34%	21.33%	+8.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.34%	21.05%	+8.29%

AIFD vs. GINN - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIFD has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GINN's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIFD vs. GINN - Dividend Comparison

AIFD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GINN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AIFD TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GINN Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF	1.16%	1.26%	1.26%	1.01%	0.69%	0.67%	0.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIFD and GINN in my portfolio?

AIFD and GINN have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIFD or GINN?

AIFD has higher volatility (8.66%) compared to GINN (3.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIFD dropped -33.20% vs GINN's -41.25%.

Which ETF is better, AIFD or GINN?

On 1-year performance, AIFD leads with 104.68% vs 25.65% for GINN. On fees, GINN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GINN has been the lower-risk option at 3.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIFD or GINN?

Over the 1-year period, AIFD has performed better with a 104.68% return vs 25.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIFD or GINN?

GINN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for AIFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIFD or GINN?

GINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.00% for AIFD.

What is the main difference between AIFD and GINN?

They also come from different issuers: TCW and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for AIFD and 0.50% for GINN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.13 vs 1.61), 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.