AUMI vs. GSIB

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB).

AUMI and GSIB are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. AUMI is a passively managed fund by Themes that tracks the performance of the Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index. It was launched on Dec 12, 2023. GSIB is an actively managed fund by Themes. It was launched on Dec 14, 2023.

Performance

AUMI vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

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

AUMI vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AUMI Themes Gold Miners ETF	5.10%	164.18%	30.61%	1.99%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	-3.15%	61.67%	32.86%	2.35%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUMI achieves a 5.10% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's -3.15% return.

AUMI

• 1D: 7.44%
• 1M: -20.93%
• YTD: 5.10%
• 6M: 21.83%
• 1Y: 106.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GSIB

• 1D: 4.01%
• 1M: -4.96%
• YTD: -3.15%
• 6M: 7.71%
• 1Y: 36.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AUMI vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AUMI and GSIB have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

AUMI

Themes Gold Miners ETF

GSIB

Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF

Return for Risk

AUMI vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUMI

AUMI Risk / Return Rank: 91
AUMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
AUMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
AUMI Omega Ratio Rank: 87
AUMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
AUMI Martin Ratio Rank: 91

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 86
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 86
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

AUMI vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) 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.

	AUMI	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	1.79	+0.37
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	2.39	+0.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.34	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	2.51	+0.83
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.89	8.62	+3.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AUMI vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUMI Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUMI and GSIB, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AUMI	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.16	1.79	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.92	2.15	-0.23

Correlation

The correlation between AUMI and GSIB is 0.26, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

AUMI vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

AUMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, less than GSIB's 1.97% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024
AUMI Themes Gold Miners ETF	0.82%	0.86%	1.84%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.97%	1.91%	1.67%

Drawdowns

AUMI vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUMI drawdown since its inception was -31.88%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUMI and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUMI	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.88%	-17.71%	-14.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.88%	-14.59%	-17.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.93%	-9.87%	-11.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.98%	-2.06%	-3.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.97%	4.25%	+4.72%

Volatility

AUMI vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) has a higher volatility of 19.60% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 7.69%. This indicates that AUMI'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

	AUMI	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.60%	7.69%	+11.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.36%	13.05%	+27.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.41%	20.79%	+28.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	41.29%	18.39%	+22.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	41.29%	18.39%	+22.90%