EIS vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

EIS (iShares MSCI Israel ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EIS is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI Israel Capped Investable Market Index (Net), while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. EIS is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, EIS returned 61.04% vs 47.83% for GSIB. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EIS charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

EIS vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Israel ETF (EIS) 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, EIS achieves a 18.11% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's 13.98% return.

EIS

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: -0.03%
• YTD: 18.11%
• 6M: 18.71%
• 1Y: 61.04%
• 3Y*: 33.86%
• 5Y*: 15.01%
• 10Y*: 12.35%

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)

EIS vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EIS iShares MSCI Israel ETF	18.11%	45.11%	34.50%	3.88%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	13.98%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between EIS and GSIB is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.46

EIS vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EIS	GSIB
Financial Services	32.0%	100.0%
Technology	19.7%	-
Industrials	10.8%	-
Healthcare	9.6%	-
Real Estate	8.8%	-
Utilities	6.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	2.7%	-
Communication Services	2.5%	-
Energy	2.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

EIS vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EIS

EIS Risk / Return Rank: 85
EIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
EIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
EIS Omega Ratio Rank: 80
EIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
EIS Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

EIS vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Israel ETF (EIS) 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.

	EIS	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.59	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	3.58	-0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.43	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.62	3.28	+1.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.86	11.54	+4.32

EIS vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EIS Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EIS 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

EIS vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EIS drawdown since its inception was -51.94%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EIS and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	EIS	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.94%	-17.71%	-34.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.40%	-13.90%	+1.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.88%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.88%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.61%	0.00%	-5.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.89%	-2.05%	-11.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.61%	3.94%	-0.33%

Volatility

EIS vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Israel ETF (EIS) has a higher volatility of 9.80% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 5.59%. This indicates that EIS'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.

Volatility by Period

	EIS	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.80%	5.59%	+4.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.62%	14.41%	+3.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.81%	17.63%	+6.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.06%	18.51%	+3.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.21%	18.51%	+2.70%

EIS vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EIS has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EIS vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

EIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, less than GSIB's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EIS iShares MSCI Israel ETF	1.22%	1.44%	1.38%	1.39%	1.66%	1.04%	0.16%	2.06%	0.87%	2.02%	1.78%	2.55%
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 EIS and GSIB in my portfolio?

EIS and GSIB have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EIS or GSIB?

EIS has higher volatility (9.80%) compared to GSIB (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EIS dropped -51.94% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, EIS or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, EIS leads with 61.04% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, EIS or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, EIS has performed better with a 61.04% return vs 47.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EIS or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EIS.

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

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 1.22% for EIS.

What is the main difference between EIS and GSIB?

EIS is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for EIS and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.41), 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.