ATMP vs. GSIB
ATMP (Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ATMP is a MLPs fund tracking the CIBC Atlas Select MLP VWAP, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. ATMP is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, ATMP returned 23.85% vs 49.09% for GSIB. Their 0.26 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ATMP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.
Performance
ATMP vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ATMP achieves a 26.22% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's 22.66% return.
ATMP
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- 5.19%
- 6M
- 17.51%
- YTD
- 26.22%
- 1Y
- 23.85%
- 3Y*
- 20.30%
- 5Y*
- 18.49%
- 10Y*
- 5.16%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.84%
GSIB
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- 6.55%
- 6M
- 18.14%
- YTD
- 22.66%
- 1Y
- 49.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 45.58%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $521.25K | $462.49K | $511.48K | |
| $2.37M | $1.31M | $753.15K |
ATMP vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN | 26.22% | 1.73% | 31.66% | 0.85% |
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF | 22.66% | 61.67% | 32.86% | 1.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between ATMP and GSIB is -0.02, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023 | 0.26 |
The correlation between ATMP and GSIB shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.26 (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
ATMP vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank
ATMP
GSIB
ATMP vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB). 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.
| ATMP | GSIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.43 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.81 | 3.38 | -0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.57 | 11.87 | -5.30 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ATMP vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ATMP drawdown since its inception was -80.86%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ATMP and GSIB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ATMP | GSIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.86% | -17.71% | -63.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.30% | -13.90% | +5.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.98% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -75.66% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.27% | -0.11% | -1.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.81% | -1.99% | -28.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.54% | 3.95% | -0.41% |
Volatility
ATMP vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP) is 5.01%, while Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a volatility of 5.74%. This indicates that ATMP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ATMP | GSIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.01% | 5.74% | -0.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.75% | 14.93% | -3.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.57% | 17.90% | -3.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.94% | 18.46% | +3.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.62% | 18.46% | +9.16% |
ATMP vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison
ATMP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
ATMP vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison
ATMP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GSIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF | 1.55% | 1.91% | 1.67% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ATMP and GSIB have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSIB has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to ATMP (5.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ATMP dropped -80.86% vs GSIB's -17.71%.
On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 49.09% vs 23.85% for ATMP. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, ATMP has been the lower-risk option at 5.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 49.09% return vs 23.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ATMP.
GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.00% for ATMP.
ATMP is categorized as MLPs, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Barclays Capital and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ATMP and 0.35% for GSIB.
GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.60), 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 ATMP and GSIB
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