ATMP vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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 20.09% vs 48.44% for GSIB. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ATMP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

ATMP vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ATMP achieves a 20.30% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's 16.30% return.

ATMP

• 1D: 1.85%
• 1M: -5.47%
• YTD: 20.30%
• 6M: 20.09%
• 1Y: 20.09%
• 3Y*: 21.81%
• 5Y*: 15.76%
• 10Y*: 4.85%

GSIB

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 7.54%
• YTD: 16.30%
• 6M: 15.82%
• 1Y: 48.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ATMP vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN	20.30%	1.73%	31.66%	0.85%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	16.30%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between ATMP and GSIB is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.30

Over the past year, the correlation between ATMP and GSIB has dropped to 0.06 - well below their long-term average of 0.30, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

ATMP vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

ATMP

ATMP Risk / Return Rank: 43
ATMP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
ATMP Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
ATMP Omega Ratio Rank: 38
ATMP Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
ATMP Martin Ratio Rank: 40

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 80
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 82
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

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 ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	2.80	-1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	3.85	-1.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.47	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.44	3.50	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.09	12.33	-6.25

ATMP vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ATMP Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ATMP and GSIB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	ATMP	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.85%	-0.60%	-5.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.03%	-2.03%	-29.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.32%	3.94%	-0.62%

Volatility

ATMP vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP) has a higher volatility of 5.61% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 4.91%. This indicates that ATMP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ATMP	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.61%	4.91%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.07%	14.38%	-3.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.35%	17.41%	-3.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.13%	18.45%	+3.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.66%	18.45%	+9.21%

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 1.64%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.64%	1.91%	1.67%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ATMP and GSIB in my portfolio?

ATMP and GSIB have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ATMP or GSIB?

ATMP has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to GSIB (4.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ATMP dropped -80.86% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, ATMP or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 48.44% vs 20.09% for ATMP. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 4.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ATMP or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 48.44% return vs 20.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ATMP or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ATMP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ATMP or GSIB?

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.64%, compared with 0.00% for ATMP.

What is the main difference between ATMP and GSIB?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.41), 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.