BTR vs. GSG
BTR (Beacon Tactical Risk ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - BTR is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by American Beacon, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. BTR is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BTR returned 5.41%/yr vs 12.51%/yr for GSG. Their -0.00 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. BTR charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
BTR vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BTR achieves a 11.46% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 32.52% return.
BTR
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 1.37%
- 6M
- 6.79%
- YTD
- 11.46%
- 1Y
- 18.17%
- 3Y*
- 5.41%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 4.70%
GSG
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 5.78%
- 6M
- 21.95%
- YTD
- 32.52%
- 1Y
- 37.47%
- 3Y*
- 12.51%
- 5Y*
- 14.20%
- 10Y*
- 8.03%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.36%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $94.73K | $82.52K | $99.04K | |
| $18.96M | $16.42M | $22.87M |
BTR vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF | 11.46% | -2.15% | 14.45% | -6.78% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 32.52% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -3.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between BTR and GSG is -0.15, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2023 | -0.00 |
The correlation between BTR and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to -0.00 (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
BTR vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
BTR
GSG
BTR vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
| BTR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.27 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.93 | 2.00 | +0.93 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.39 | 6.32 | +5.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BTR vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BTR drawdown since its inception was -16.67%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BTR and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BTR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.67% | -89.62% | +72.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.23% | -18.81% | +12.58% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.67% | -18.81% | +2.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.19% | -59.99% | +59.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.32% | -63.67% | +58.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.60% | 5.94% | -4.34% |
Volatility
BTR vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR) is 2.50%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 8.99%. This indicates that BTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BTR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.50% | 8.99% | -6.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.26% | 21.89% | -14.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.79% | 24.44% | -14.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.81% | 22.90% | -12.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.81% | 22.08% | -11.27% |
BTR vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
BTR has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
BTR vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
BTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF | 1.16% | 1.29% | 0.87% | 0.91% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BTR and GSG have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (8.99%) compared to BTR (2.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BTR dropped -16.67% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 3-year performance, GSG leads with 12.51% vs 5.41% for BTR. On fees, GSG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BTR has been the lower-risk option at 2.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GSG has performed better with a 12.51% return vs 5.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BTR.
BTR has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
BTR is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: American Beacon and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BTR and 0.75% for GSG.
BTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.54), 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 BTR and GSG
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