FGM vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FGM (First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FGM is a Europe Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ AlphaDEX Germany Index, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. FGM is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, FGM returned 18.86% vs 47.83% for GSIB. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FGM charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

FGM vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund (FGM) 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, FGM achieves a 3.19% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 13.98% return.

FGM

• 1D: 1.21%
• 1M: -2.19%
• YTD: 3.19%
• 6M: 4.60%
• 1Y: 18.86%
• 3Y*: 20.38%
• 5Y*: 4.13%
• 10Y*: 8.76%

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)

FGM vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FGM First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund	3.19%	63.60%	1.36%	0.28%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	13.98%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between FGM and GSIB is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.65

The correlation between FGM and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

FGM vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FGM	GSIB
Industrials	40.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	16.6%	-
Real Estate	10.8%	-
Basic Materials	9.0%	-
Financial Services	8.2%	100.0%
Healthcare	6.4%	-
Communication Services	3.2%	-
Utilities	3.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	-
Energy	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

FGM vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

FGM

FGM Risk / Return Rank: 25
FGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
FGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
FGM Omega Ratio Rank: 25
FGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
FGM Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

FGM vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund (FGM) 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.

	FGM	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	2.59	-1.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.28	3.58	-2.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.43	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.98	3.28	-2.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.01	11.54	-8.53

FGM vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGM Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGM 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

FGM vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGM drawdown since its inception was -51.58%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGM and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGM	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.58%	-17.71%	-33.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.76%	-13.90%	-3.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.93%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.22%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.26%	0.00%	-8.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.72%	-2.05%	-12.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.81%	3.94%	+1.87%

Volatility

FGM vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund (FGM) has a higher volatility of 6.75% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 5.59%. This indicates that FGM'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

	FGM	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.75%	5.59%	+1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.55%	14.41%	+3.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.94%	17.63%	+3.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.54%	18.51%	+6.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.11%	18.51%	+4.60%

FGM vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGM has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

FGM vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

FGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than GSIB's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FGM First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund	0.64%	0.66%	2.56%	2.82%	5.44%	1.43%	1.33%	2.30%	2.18%	2.11%	1.33%	1.13%
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 FGM and GSIB in my portfolio?

FGM and GSIB have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FGM or GSIB?

FGM has higher volatility (6.75%) compared to GSIB (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FGM dropped -51.58% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, FGM or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 47.83% vs 18.86% for FGM. 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, FGM or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 47.83% return vs 18.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FGM or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FGM.

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

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 0.64% for FGM.

What is the main difference between FGM and GSIB?

FGM is categorized as Europe Equities, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FGM and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 0.84), 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.