PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
COPJ vs. GSIB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

COPJ vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COPJ achieves a 8.25% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 13.98% return.


COPJ

1D
4.06%
1M
-7.22%
YTD
8.25%
6M
18.98%
1Y
100.49%
3Y*
41.69%
5Y*
10Y*

GSIB

1D
1.92%
1M
8.41%
YTD
13.98%
6M
16.88%
1Y
47.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

COPJ vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
COPJ
Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF
8.25%140.63%11.07%4.60%
GSIB
Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF
13.98%61.67%32.86%1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between COPJ and GSIB is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023

0.49

COPJ vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
COPJ
GSIB

Basic Materials

100.0%

-

Technology

3.6%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

100.0%

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

COPJ
100.0%
GSIB

-

Technology

COPJ
3.6%
GSIB

-

Communication Services

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Consumer Cyclical

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Consumer Defensive

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Energy

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Financial Services

COPJ

-

GSIB
100.0%

Healthcare

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Industrials

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Real Estate

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

Utilities

COPJ

-

GSIB

-

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

COPJ vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

COPJ
COPJ Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
COPJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COPJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
COPJ Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
COPJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
COPJ Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

GSIB
GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

COPJ vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF (COPJ) 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.


COPJGSIBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.95

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.43

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.21

3.28

-0.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.96

11.54

-2.58

COPJ vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COPJ Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is comparable to the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COPJ 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

COPJ vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COPJ drawdown since its inception was -32.28%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COPJ and GSIB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


COPJGSIBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.28%

-17.71%

-14.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.28%

-13.90%

-18.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-32.28%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.26%

0.00%

-17.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.97%

-2.05%

-9.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.53%

3.94%

+7.59%

Volatility

COPJ vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF (COPJ) has a higher volatility of 19.44% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 5.59%. This indicates that COPJ'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


COPJGSIBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

19.44%

5.59%

+13.85%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

37.98%

14.41%

+23.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

44.42%

17.63%

+26.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

35.48%

18.51%

+16.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

35.48%

18.51%

+16.97%

COPJ vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

COPJ has a 0.78% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

COPJ vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

COPJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.69%, more than GSIB's 1.67% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
COPJ
Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF
10.69%11.57%11.64%2.48%
GSIB
Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF
1.67%1.91%1.67%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


COPJ and GSIB have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COPJ has higher volatility (19.44%) compared to GSIB (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COPJ dropped -32.28% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

On 1-year performance, COPJ leads with 100.49% vs 47.83% for GSIB. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 5.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, COPJ has performed better with a 100.49% return vs 47.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for COPJ.

COPJ has the higher dividend yield at 10.69%, compared with 1.67% for GSIB.

COPJ is categorized as Copper, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.78% for COPJ and 0.35% for GSIB.

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.33), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for COPJ and GSIB

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