BWZ vs. GSG
BWZ (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - BWZ is a International Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, BWZ returned -0.52%/yr vs 7.61%/yr for GSG. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BWZ charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
BWZ vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BWZ achieves a -1.27% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 33.95% return. Over the past 10 years, BWZ has underperformed GSG with an annualized return of -0.52%, while GSG has yielded a comparatively higher 7.61% annualized return.
BWZ
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- -0.80%
- 6M
- -0.65%
- YTD
- -1.27%
- 1Y
- -1.21%
- 3Y*
- 1.33%
- 5Y*
- -1.65%
- 10Y*
- -0.52%
GSG
- 1D
- -0.93%
- 1M
- 4.15%
- 6M
- 29.74%
- YTD
- 33.95%
- 1Y
- 37.41%
- 3Y*
- 15.32%
- 5Y*
- 14.20%
- 10Y*
- 7.61%
BWZ vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | -1.27% | 10.47% | -5.31% | 2.97% | -10.56% | -6.85% | 6.47% | 0.99% | -3.36% | 10.18% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 33.95% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 38.77% | -23.94% | 15.62% | -13.88% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between BWZ and GSG is -0.20, 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 | -0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2009 | 0.18 |
The correlation between BWZ and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to 0.18 (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
BWZ vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
BWZ
GSG
BWZ vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) 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.
| BWZ | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.40 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.29 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.24 | 2.00 | -2.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.46 | 6.66 | -7.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BWZ vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BWZ drawdown since its inception was -34.23%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BWZ and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BWZ | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.23% | -89.62% | +55.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.15% | -18.81% | +13.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.60% | -18.81% | +10.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.09% | -29.12% | +7.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.90% | -57.64% | +32.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.90% | -59.56% | +36.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.14% | -63.68% | +47.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.65% | 5.63% | -2.98% |
Volatility
BWZ vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) is 1.76%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.17%. This indicates that BWZ 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
| BWZ | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.76% | 7.17% | -5.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.16% | 21.54% | -16.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.84% | 23.48% | -16.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.60% | 22.80% | -15.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.94% | 22.00% | -15.06% |
BWZ vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
BWZ has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
BWZ vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
BWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | 2.11% | 2.05% | 2.47% | 1.63% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 0.13% | 0.43% | 1.10% | 0.40% | 0.13% | 0.06% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BWZ and GSG have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.17%) compared to BWZ (1.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BWZ dropped -34.23% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 10-year performance, GSG leads with 7.61% vs -0.52% for BWZ. On fees, BWZ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BWZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GSG has performed better with a 7.61% return vs -0.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BWZ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
BWZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
BWZ is categorized as International Government Bonds, while GSG is Commodities. BWZ tracks Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BWZ and 0.75% for GSG.
GSG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs -0.18), 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 BWZ 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