CSHI vs. GBIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSHI (Neos Enhanced Income Cash Alternative ETF) and GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSHI is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the NONE, while GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CSHI returned 5.45%/yr vs 4.64%/yr for GBIL. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. CSHI charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GBIL.

Performance

CSHI vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neos Enhanced Income Cash Alternative ETF (CSHI) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSHI achieves a 2.26% return, which is significantly higher than GBIL's 1.42% return.

CSHI

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.37%
• YTD: 2.26%
• 6M: 2.59%
• 1Y: 5.25%
• 3Y*: 5.45%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GBIL

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 1.42%
• 6M: 1.73%
• 1Y: 3.91%
• 3Y*: 4.64%
• 5Y*: 3.32%
• 10Y*: —

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

CSHI vs. GBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CSHI Neos Enhanced Income Cash Alternative ETF	2.26%	5.05%	5.66%	6.21%	1.46%
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF	1.42%	4.12%	5.24%	4.91%	0.96%

Correlation

The correlation between CSHI and GBIL is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2022	-0.04

Return for Risk

CSHI vs. GBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSHI

CSHI Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
CSHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHI Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
CSHI Martin Ratio Rank: 99

GBIL

GBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100
GBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

CSHI vs. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neos Enhanced Income Cash Alternative ETF (CSHI) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). 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.

	CSHI	GBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	6.16	16.89	-10.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	11.83	102.89	-91.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.75	39.42	-36.67
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	29.16	196.43	-167.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	154.18	1,608.66	-1,454.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSHI vs. GBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSHI Sharpe Ratio is 6.16, which is lower than the GBIL Sharpe Ratio of 16.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSHI and GBIL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CSHI	GBIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.16	16.89	-10.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	5.78	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	4.18	4.87	-0.69

Drawdowns

CSHI vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSHI drawdown since its inception was -1.69%, which is greater than GBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSHI and GBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSHI	GBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.69%	-0.76%	-0.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.18%	-0.02%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-1.69%	-0.76%	-0.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.03%	-0.04%	+0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.03%	0.00%	+0.03%

Volatility

CSHI vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison

Neos Enhanced Income Cash Alternative ETF (CSHI) has a higher volatility of 0.11% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) at 0.04%. This indicates that CSHI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSHI	GBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.11%	0.04%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.52%	0.14%	+0.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86%	0.23%	+0.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.32%	0.58%	+0.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.32%	0.47%	+0.85%

CSHI vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSHI has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSHI vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison

CSHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, more than GBIL's 3.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CSHI Neos Enhanced Income Cash Alternative ETF	4.90%	5.11%	5.72%	6.15%	1.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF	3.74%	4.02%	4.93%	4.77%	1.37%	0.00%	0.81%	2.20%	1.70%	0.74%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSHI and GBIL in my portfolio?

CSHI and GBIL have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CSHI or GBIL?

CSHI has higher volatility (0.11%) compared to GBIL (0.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSHI dropped -1.69% vs GBIL's -0.76%.

Which ETF is better, CSHI or GBIL?

On 3-year performance, CSHI leads with 5.45% vs 4.64% for GBIL. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CSHI or GBIL?

Over the 3-year period, CSHI has performed better with a 5.45% return vs 4.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSHI or GBIL?

GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for CSHI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CSHI or GBIL?

CSHI has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 3.74% for GBIL.

What is the main difference between CSHI and GBIL?

CSHI is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while GBIL is Government Bonds. CSHI tracks NONE, while GBIL tracks FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Neos and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for CSHI and 0.12% for GBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.89 vs 6.16), 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.