ARMH vs. GINN
ARMH (Arm Holdings PLC ADRhedged ETF) and GINN (Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. ARMH is actively managed, while GINN is passively managed. Their 0.50 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ARMH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for GINN.
Performance
ARMH vs. GINN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ARMH
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- -24.02%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
GINN
- 1D
- 1.55%
- 1M
- 1.06%
- 6M
- 7.30%
- YTD
- 9.33%
- 1Y
- 21.13%
- 3Y*
- 18.35%
- 5Y*
- 6.21%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 8.96%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $185.31K | $454.05K | $691.73K | |
| $141.87K | $128.01K | $214.74K |
ARMH vs. GINN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ARMH Arm Holdings PLC ADRhedged ETF | -22.64% |
GINN Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF | 1.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between ARMH and GINN is 0.50, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.50 |
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
ARMH vs. GINN — Risk / Return Rank
ARMH
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GINN
ARMH vs. GINN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Arm Holdings PLC ADRhedged ETF (ARMH) 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.
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.
| ARMH | GINN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.22 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.61 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 5.47 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ARMH vs. GINN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ARMH drawdown since its inception was -48.81%, which is greater than GINN's maximum drawdown of -41.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARMH and GINN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ARMH | GINN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.81% | -41.25% | -7.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -13.18% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -22.25% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -41.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -45.83% | -1.00% | -44.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.50% | -13.08% | -10.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.87% | — |
Volatility
ARMH vs. GINN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ARMH | GINN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.15% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.00% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 97.98% | 16.63% | +81.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 97.98% | 21.45% | +76.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 97.98% | 20.95% | +77.03% |
ARMH vs. GINN - Expense Ratio Comparison
ARMH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than GINN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
ARMH vs. GINN - Dividend Comparison
ARMH has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GINN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARMH Arm Holdings PLC ADRhedged 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 | 1.15% | 1.26% | 1.26% | 1.01% | 0.69% | 0.67% | 0.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ARMH and GINN have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ARMH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ARMH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for GINN.
GINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.00% for ARMH.
They also come from different issuers: Precidian and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ARMH and 0.50% for GINN.
Find the right allocation for ARMH and GINN
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