FTMN vs. GSG
FTMN (Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - FTMN is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Actively Managed, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.32, they often move in opposite directions. FTMN charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
FTMN vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTMN achieves a 1.52% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return.
FTMN
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- YTD
- 1.52%
- 6M
- 2.03%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -4.83%
- YTD
- 42.58%
- 6M
- 41.06%
- 1Y
- 51.52%
- 3Y*
- 19.31%
- 5Y*
- 15.74%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
FTMN vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTMN Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF | 1.52% | 0.61% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 42.58% | -1.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTMN and GSG is -0.32, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2025 | -0.32 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FTMN vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
FTMN
GSG
FTMN vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF (FTMN) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FTMN | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.26 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.94 | -0.09 | +1.03 |
Drawdowns
FTMN vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTMN drawdown since its inception was -3.10%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMN and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTMN | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.10% | -89.62% | +86.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.41% | -56.95% | +56.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.71% | -63.71% | +63.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.59% | — |
Volatility
FTMN vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTMN | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 7.65% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 20.42% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.14% | 22.95% | -18.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.14% | 22.61% | -18.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.14% | 22.03% | -17.89% |
FTMN vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTMN has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTMN vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
FTMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
FTMN Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF | 1.83% | 0.50% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTMN and GSG have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FTMN is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FTMN is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
FTMN has the higher dividend yield at 1.83%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
FTMN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while GSG is Commodities. FTMN tracks Actively Managed, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTMN and 0.75% for GSG.
Find the right allocation for FTMN and GSG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer