BPAY vs. GSIB

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BPAY (BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BPAY returned -8.96% vs 49.59% for GSIB. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BPAY charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

BPAY vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF (BPAY) 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, BPAY achieves a 1.06% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 23.08% return.

BPAY

• 1D: 2.59%
• 1M: 2.70%
• 6M: 7.30%
• YTD: 1.06%
• 1Y: -8.96%
• 3Y*: 10.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.12%

GSIB

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: 6.91%
• 6M: 16.90%
• YTD: 23.08%
• 1Y: 49.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 45.60%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BPAY BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF	$86.28K	$88.05K	$57.14K
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	$1.86M	$1.42M	$773.56K

BPAY vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BPAY BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF	1.06%	8.54%	17.28%	2.08%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	23.08%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between BPAY and GSIB is 0.56, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.62

The correlation between BPAY and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

BPAY vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BPAY	GSIB
Financial Services	54.2%	99.6%
Technology	35.5%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.1%	-
Industrials	4.3%	-
Real Estate	2.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BPAY vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BPAY

BPAY Risk / Return Rank: 7
BPAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
BPAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
BPAY Omega Ratio Rank: 7
BPAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
BPAY Martin Ratio Rank: 8

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 91
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 92
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BPAY vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF (BPAY) 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.

	BPAY	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.34	2.80	-3.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.31	3.86	-4.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.46	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.27	3.58	-3.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.50	12.59	-13.09

BPAY vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BPAY Sharpe Ratio is -0.34, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BPAY 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

BPAY vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BPAY drawdown since its inception was -33.62%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BPAY and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BPAY	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.62%	-17.71%	-15.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.78%	-13.90%	-18.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.63%	0.00%	-14.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.92%	-1.99%	-8.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.96%	3.95%	+14.01%

Volatility

BPAY vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF (BPAY) has a higher volatility of 6.93% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 5.73%. This indicates that BPAY'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

	BPAY	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.93%	5.73%	+1.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.41%	14.90%	+5.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.16%	17.83%	+8.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.50%	18.45%	+6.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.50%	18.45%	+6.05%

BPAY vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BPAY has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

BPAY vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

BPAY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.71%, more than GSIB's 1.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BPAY BlackRock Future Financial and Technology ETF	6.71%	6.49%	0.48%	1.18%	0.18%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.55%	1.91%	1.67%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BPAY and GSIB in my portfolio?

BPAY and GSIB have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BPAY or GSIB?

BPAY has higher volatility (6.93%) compared to GSIB (5.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BPAY dropped -33.62% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, BPAY or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 49.59% vs -8.96% for BPAY. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 5.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BPAY or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 49.59% return vs -8.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BPAY or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for BPAY.

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

BPAY has the higher dividend yield at 6.71%, compared with 1.55% for GSIB.

What is the main difference between BPAY and GSIB?

They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for BPAY and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs -0.34), 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.