CTWO vs. GSG
CTWO (COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both Commodities funds. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. CTWO charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
CTWO vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CTWO achieves a -15.24% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return.
CTWO
- 1D
- 2.00%
- 1M
- 1.51%
- YTD
- -15.24%
- 6M
- -10.98%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -4.83%
- YTD
- 42.58%
- 6M
- 41.06%
- 1Y
- 51.52%
- 3Y*
- 19.31%
- 5Y*
- 15.74%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
CTWO vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CTWO COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust | -15.24% | 15.78% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 42.58% | -2.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between CTWO and GSG is -0.06, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2025 | -0.06 |
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
CTWO vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
CTWO
GSG
CTWO vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust (CTWO) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CTWO | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.26 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.07 | -0.09 | +0.02 |
Drawdowns
CTWO vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CTWO drawdown since its inception was -30.13%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTWO and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CTWO | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.13% | -89.62% | +59.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.94% | — |
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 | -24.89% | -56.95% | +32.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.19% | -63.71% | +54.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.59% | — |
Volatility
CTWO vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CTWO | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 7.65% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 20.42% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.94% | 22.95% | +4.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.94% | 22.61% | +5.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.94% | 22.03% | +5.91% |
CTWO vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CTWO has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CTWO vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
Neither CTWO nor GSG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CTWO and GSG have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GSG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GSG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for CTWO.
CTWO and GSG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: COtwo Advisors and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for CTWO and 0.75% for GSG.
Find the right allocation for CTWO 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