BERZ vs. GPIQ

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

BERZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BERZ is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index, while GPIQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs. BERZ is passively managed, while GPIQ is actively managed. Over the past year, BERZ returned -75.61% vs 26.42% for GPIQ. At a correlation of -0.94, they often move in opposite directions. BERZ charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for GPIQ.

Performance

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BERZ achieves a -54.50% return, which is significantly lower than GPIQ's 14.10% return.

BERZ

• 1D: 8.13%
• 1M: 12.66%
• 6M: -51.50%
• YTD: -54.50%
• 1Y: -75.61%
• 3Y*: -72.79%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GPIQ

• 1D: -1.49%
• 1M: -2.44%
• 6M: 12.67%
• YTD: 14.10%
• 1Y: 26.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BERZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-54.50%	-78.81%	-65.95%	-49.68%
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	14.10%	19.77%	23.22%	15.17%

Correlation

The correlation between BERZ and GPIQ is -0.93, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2023	-0.94

The correlation between BERZ and GPIQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.94 to -0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BERZ	GPIQ
Technology	60.8%	58.7%
Communication Services	26.2%	14.1%
Financial Services	13.3%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	13.0%	11.6%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.4%
Energy	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	3.6%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.3%

Return for Risk

BERZ vs. GPIQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

BERZ

BERZ Risk / Return Rank: 1
BERZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
BERZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Martin Ratio Rank: 1

GPIQ

GPIQ Risk / Return Rank: 65
GPIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
GPIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
GPIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 61
GPIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
GPIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ). 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.

	BERZ	GPIQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.91	1.66	-2.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.80	2.25	-4.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.81	1.30	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.90	2.79	-3.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.42	11.26	-12.68

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BERZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.91, which is lower than the GPIQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BERZ and GPIQ, 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

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BERZ drawdown since its inception was -99.80%, which is greater than GPIQ's maximum drawdown of -21.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BERZ and GPIQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BERZ	GPIQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.80%	-21.06%	-78.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-83.72%	-9.51%	-74.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-98.87%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.73%	-3.85%	-95.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-72.17%	-2.28%	-69.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	53.42%	2.35%	+51.07%

Volatility

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) has a higher volatility of 25.86% compared to Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) at 6.67%. This indicates that BERZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GPIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BERZ	GPIQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	25.86%	6.67%	+19.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	65.71%	13.44%	+52.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	82.83%	15.94%	+66.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	92.62%	17.95%	+74.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	92.62%	17.95%	+74.67%

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BERZ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than GPIQ's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

BERZ vs. GPIQ - Dividend Comparison

BERZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GPIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.90%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BERZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	9.90%	9.81%	9.18%	1.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BERZ and GPIQ in my portfolio?

BERZ and GPIQ have a correlation of -0.93, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BERZ or GPIQ?

BERZ has higher volatility (25.86%) compared to GPIQ (6.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BERZ dropped -99.80% vs GPIQ's -21.06%.

Which ETF is better, BERZ or GPIQ?

On 1-year performance, GPIQ leads with 26.42% vs -75.61% for BERZ. On fees, GPIQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, GPIQ has been the lower-risk option at 6.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BERZ or GPIQ?

Over the 1-year period, GPIQ has performed better with a 26.42% return vs -75.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BERZ or GPIQ?

GPIQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BERZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BERZ or GPIQ?

GPIQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.90%, compared with 0.00% for BERZ.

What is the main difference between BERZ and GPIQ?

BERZ is categorized as Inverse Equities, while GPIQ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BERZ and 0.29% for GPIQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GPIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs -0.91), 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.