CSHP vs. GBIL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) and GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares, while GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. CSHP is actively managed, while GBIL is passively managed. Over the past year, CSHP returned 3.89% vs 3.80% for GBIL. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSHP charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GBIL.

Performance

CSHP vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) 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, CSHP achieves a 1.79% return, which is significantly higher than GBIL's 1.58% return.

CSHP

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 6M: 1.85%
• 1Y: 3.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GBIL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.26%
• YTD: 1.58%
• 6M: 1.66%
• 1Y: 3.80%
• 3Y*: 4.59%
• 5Y*: 3.35%
• 10Y*: —

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

CSHP vs. GBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.79%	4.10%	2.24%
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF	1.58%	4.12%	2.41%

Correlation

The correlation between CSHP and GBIL is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	0.22

Return for Risk

CSHP vs. GBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

CSHP vs. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) 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.

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.

	CSHP	GBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	10.81	16.73	-5.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	26.16	103.73	-77.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	6.09	42.48	-36.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	48.60	190.69	-142.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	338.28	1,677.71	-1,339.43

CSHP vs. GBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSHP Sharpe Ratio is 10.81, which is lower than the GBIL Sharpe Ratio of 16.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSHP 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.

Drawdowns

CSHP vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSHP drawdown since its inception was -0.08%, smaller than the maximum GBIL drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSHP and GBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSHP	GBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.08%	-0.76%	+0.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.08%	-0.02%	-0.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.76%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.08%	0.00%	-0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.00%	-0.04%	+0.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.01%	0.00%	+0.01%

Volatility

CSHP vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison

iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) has a higher volatility of 0.16% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) at 0.05%. This indicates that CSHP'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

	CSHP	GBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.16%	0.05%	+0.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.27%	0.14%	+0.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36%	0.23%	+0.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.41%	0.58%	-0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.41%	0.47%	-0.06%

CSHP vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSHP has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

CSHP vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison

CSHP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.92%, more than GBIL's 3.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.92%	5.39%	1.96%	0.00%	0.00%	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 CSHP and GBIL in my portfolio?

CSHP and GBIL have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CSHP or GBIL?

CSHP has higher volatility (0.16%) compared to GBIL (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSHP dropped -0.08% vs GBIL's -0.76%.

Which ETF is better, CSHP or GBIL?

On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.89% vs 3.80% for GBIL. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CSHP or GBIL?

Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.89% return vs 3.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSHP or GBIL?

GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CSHP.

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

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.92%, compared with 3.74% for GBIL.

What is the main difference between CSHP and GBIL?

CSHP is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while GBIL is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CSHP and 0.12% for GBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.73 vs 10.81), 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.