DFJ vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

DFJ (WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Fund) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFJ is a Japan Equities fund tracking the WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Index, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. DFJ is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, DFJ returned 28.50% vs 47.83% for GSIB. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DFJ charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

DFJ vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Fund (DFJ) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFJ achieves a 10.31% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 13.98% return.

DFJ

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: 10.31%
• 6M: 11.99%
• 1Y: 28.50%
• 3Y*: 18.53%
• 5Y*: 9.75%
• 10Y*: 9.18%

GSIB

• 1D: 1.92%
• 1M: 6.99%
• YTD: 13.98%
• 6M: 16.88%
• 1Y: 47.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFJ vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFJ WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Fund	10.31%	31.90%	2.80%	3.02%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	13.98%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between DFJ and GSIB is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.48

The correlation between DFJ and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFJ vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFJ	GSIB
Industrials	27.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	16.1%	-
Basic Materials	13.3%	-
Financial Services	13.3%	100.0%
Technology	12.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	7.1%	-
Healthcare	4.1%	-
Real Estate	2.9%	-
Utilities	1.6%	-
Communication Services	1.5%	-
Energy	0.6%	-

Return for Risk

DFJ vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFJ

DFJ Risk / Return Rank: 50
DFJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
DFJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
DFJ Omega Ratio Rank: 52
DFJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
DFJ Martin Ratio Rank: 42

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 81
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 83
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

DFJ vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Fund (DFJ) 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.

	DFJ	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	2.59	-0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	3.58	-1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.43	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.11	3.28	-1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.97	11.54	-5.57

DFJ vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFJ 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.

Drawdowns

DFJ vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFJ drawdown since its inception was -46.00%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFJ and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFJ	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.00%	-17.71%	-28.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.03%	-13.90%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.71%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.02%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.85%	0.00%	-5.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.15%	-2.05%	-9.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.61%	3.94%	+0.67%

Volatility

DFJ vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Fund (DFJ) is 4.87%, while Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a volatility of 5.59%. This indicates that DFJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFJ	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.87%	5.59%	-0.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.79%	14.41%	-0.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.68%	17.63%	-0.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.94%	18.51%	-2.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.97%	18.51%	-1.54%

DFJ vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFJ has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFJ vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

DFJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than GSIB's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFJ WisdomTree Japan SmallCap Dividend Fund	2.41%	2.68%	2.46%	2.43%	2.62%	2.07%	2.59%	2.24%	1.89%	1.60%	1.76%	1.23%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.67%	1.91%	1.67%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFJ and GSIB in my portfolio?

DFJ and GSIB have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFJ or GSIB?

GSIB has higher volatility (5.59%) compared to DFJ (4.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFJ dropped -46.00% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, DFJ or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 47.83% vs 28.50% for DFJ. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, DFJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFJ or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 47.83% return vs 28.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFJ or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for DFJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFJ or GSIB?

DFJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 1.67% for GSIB.

What is the main difference between DFJ and GSIB?

DFJ is categorized as Japan Equities, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for DFJ and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.65), 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.