EWS vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EWS (iShares MSCI Singapore ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWS is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Singapore Index, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. EWS is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, EWS returned 18.15% vs 47.83% for GSIB. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWS charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

EWS vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (EWS) 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, EWS achieves a 5.96% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 13.98% return.

EWS

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.24%
• YTD: 5.96%
• 6M: 7.68%
• 1Y: 18.15%
• 3Y*: 20.28%
• 5Y*: 8.93%
• 10Y*: 7.88%

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)

EWS vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EWS iShares MSCI Singapore ETF	5.96%	31.35%	22.10%	4.39%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	13.98%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between EWS and GSIB is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.57

The correlation between EWS and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWS vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWS	GSIB
Financial Services	52.2%	100.0%
Industrials	18.1%	-
Real Estate	8.6%	-
Utilities	4.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	-
Communication Services	4.2%	-
Technology	4.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

EWS vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWS

EWS Risk / Return Rank: 39
EWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
EWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
EWS Omega Ratio Rank: 35
EWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
EWS Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

EWS vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	EWS	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.15	2.59	-1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	3.58	-1.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.43	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.24	3.28	-1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.40	11.54	-6.14

EWS vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWS Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWS 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

EWS vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWS drawdown since its inception was -75.13%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWS and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWS	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.13%	-17.71%	-57.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.82%	-13.90%	+6.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.34%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.77%	0.00%	-2.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.98%	-2.05%	-19.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.23%	3.94%	-0.71%

Volatility

EWS vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (EWS) is 5.05%, while Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a volatility of 5.59%. This indicates that EWS 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

	EWS	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.05%	5.59%	-0.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.11%	14.41%	-2.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.24%	17.63%	-2.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.34%	18.51%	-1.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.04%	18.51%	-0.47%

EWS vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWS has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWS vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

EWS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.87%, more than GSIB's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EWS iShares MSCI Singapore ETF	3.87%	4.10%	4.28%	6.50%	2.56%	6.00%	2.68%	4.70%	4.21%	3.46%	3.96%	4.20%
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 EWS and GSIB in my portfolio?

EWS and GSIB have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWS or GSIB?

GSIB has higher volatility (5.59%) compared to EWS (5.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWS dropped -75.13% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, EWS or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 47.83% vs 18.15% for EWS. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EWS has been the lower-risk option at 5.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EWS or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 47.83% return vs 18.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWS or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EWS.

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

EWS has the higher dividend yield at 3.87%, compared with 1.67% for GSIB.

What is the main difference between EWS and GSIB?

EWS is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWS and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.15), 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.