EMLP vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMLP is a MLPs fund actively managed by First Trust, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMLP returned 19.70% vs 47.83% for GSIB. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMLP charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

EMLP vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) 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, EMLP achieves a 15.76% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's 13.98% return.

EMLP

• 1D: 0.79%
• 1M: -1.31%
• YTD: 15.76%
• 6M: 15.73%
• 1Y: 19.70%
• 3Y*: 21.55%
• 5Y*: 15.13%
• 10Y*: 10.37%

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)

EMLP vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	15.76%	9.67%	33.39%	-0.17%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	13.98%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between EMLP and GSIB is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.35

The correlation between EMLP and GSIB shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMLP vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMLP	GSIB
Energy	48.1%	-
Utilities	47.4%	-
Industrials	3.9%	-
Basic Materials	0.6%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

EMLP vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMLP

EMLP Risk / Return Rank: 74
EMLP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
EMLP Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
EMLP Omega Ratio Rank: 66
EMLP Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
EMLP Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

EMLP vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) 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.

	EMLP	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.02	2.59	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.92	3.58	-0.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.43	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.03	3.28	+0.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.36	11.54	+0.82

EMLP vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMLP Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMLP 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

EMLP vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMLP drawdown since its inception was -43.61%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLP and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMLP	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.61%	-17.71%	-25.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.94%	-13.90%	+8.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.47%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.59%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.61%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.66%	0.00%	-2.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.75%	-2.05%	-3.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.61%	3.94%	-2.33%

Volatility

EMLP vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) is 3.79%, while Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a volatility of 5.59%. This indicates that EMLP 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

	EMLP	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.79%	5.59%	-1.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.86%	14.41%	-6.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.87%	17.63%	-7.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.53%	18.51%	-3.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.69%	18.51%	-0.82%

EMLP vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMLP has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMLP vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

EMLP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, more than GSIB's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	2.76%	3.18%	3.19%	3.92%	3.15%	3.29%	4.70%	3.71%	4.71%	3.80%	3.62%	4.63%
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 EMLP and GSIB in my portfolio?

EMLP and GSIB have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMLP or GSIB?

GSIB has higher volatility (5.59%) compared to EMLP (3.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLP dropped -43.61% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, EMLP or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 47.83% vs 19.70% for EMLP. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 3.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMLP or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 47.83% return vs 19.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMLP or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.

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

EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 1.67% for GSIB.

What is the main difference between EMLP and GSIB?

EMLP is categorized as MLPs, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for EMLP and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.02), 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.