GBIL vs. FAAR
GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) and FAAR (First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index, while FAAR is a Commodities fund actively managed by First Trust. GBIL is passively managed, while FAAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GBIL returned 3.35%/yr vs 8.03%/yr for FAAR. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. GBIL charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FAAR.
Performance
GBIL vs. FAAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GBIL achieves a 1.56% return, which is significantly lower than FAAR's 20.28% return.
GBIL
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 1.56%
- 6M
- 1.67%
- 1Y
- 3.82%
- 3Y*
- 4.61%
- 5Y*
- 3.35%
- 10Y*
- —
FAAR
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- -4.57%
- YTD
- 20.28%
- 6M
- 20.86%
- 1Y
- 26.92%
- 3Y*
- 10.85%
- 5Y*
- 8.03%
- 10Y*
- 4.74%
GBIL vs. FAAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 1.56% | 4.12% | 5.24% | 4.91% | 1.05% | -0.08% | 0.79% | 2.31% | 1.78% | 0.69% |
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF | 20.28% | 8.07% | 5.97% | -5.63% | 10.15% | 12.34% | 8.60% | -1.28% | -9.17% | 5.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between GBIL and FAAR is -0.10, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2016 | -0.04 |
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
GBIL vs. FAAR — Risk / Return Rank
GBIL
FAAR
GBIL vs. FAAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) and First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR). 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.
| GBIL | FAAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +14.94 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +102.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 43.14 | 1.34 | +41.80 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 193.82 | 4.72 | +189.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1,643.20 | 14.40 | +1,628.80 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GBIL vs. FAAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.76%, smaller than the maximum FAAR drawdown of -18.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBIL and FAAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GBIL | FAAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.76% | -18.03% | +17.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.02% | -5.68% | +5.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.76% | -11.54% | +10.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.76% | -18.03% | +17.27% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -18.03% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -5.39% | +5.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.04% | -7.83% | +7.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.00% | 1.87% | -1.87% |
Volatility
GBIL vs. FAAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) is 0.04%, while First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) has a volatility of 2.50%. This indicates that GBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FAAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GBIL | FAAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.04% | 2.50% | -2.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.13% | 9.71% | -9.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23% | 13.36% | -13.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.58% | 12.95% | -12.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.47% | 11.53% | -11.06% |
GBIL vs. FAAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
GBIL has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than FAAR's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
GBIL vs. FAAR - Dividend Comparison
GBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, less than FAAR's 9.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF | 9.57% | 11.63% | 3.45% | 3.20% | 5.82% | 6.49% | 3.05% | 1.02% | 0.58% | 2.83% | 0.00% |
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 3.74% | 4.02% | 4.93% | 4.77% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 2.20% | 1.70% | 0.74% | 0.11% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GBIL and FAAR have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FAAR has higher volatility (2.50%) compared to GBIL (0.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBIL dropped -0.76% vs FAAR's -18.03%.
On 5-year performance, FAAR leads with 8.03% vs 3.35% for GBIL. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FAAR has performed better with a 8.03% return vs 3.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FAAR.
FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 9.57%, compared with 3.74% for GBIL.
GBIL is categorized as Government Bonds, while FAAR is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GBIL and 0.95% for FAAR.
GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.94 vs 2.01), 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.
Find the right allocation for GBIL and FAAR
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