GBIL vs. TFLR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) and TFLR (T. Rowe Price Floating Rate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index, while TFLR is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by T. Rowe Price. GBIL is passively managed, while TFLR is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GBIL returned 4.59%/yr vs 7.75%/yr for TFLR. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. GBIL charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for TFLR.

Performance

GBIL vs. TFLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) and T. Rowe Price Floating Rate ETF (TFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBIL achieves a 1.57% return, which is significantly higher than TFLR's 1.27% return.

GBIL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 1.57%
• 6M: 1.66%
• 1Y: 3.81%
• 3Y*: 4.59%
• 5Y*: 3.35%
• 10Y*: —

TFLR

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -0.04%
• YTD: 1.27%
• 6M: 1.45%
• 1Y: 5.25%
• 3Y*: 7.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GBIL vs. TFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF	1.57%	4.12%	5.24%	4.91%	0.55%
TFLR T. Rowe Price Floating Rate ETF	1.27%	6.57%	8.77%	12.05%	-0.44%

Correlation

The correlation between GBIL and TFLR is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2022	-0.09

Return for Risk

GBIL vs. TFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GBIL

GBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100
GBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

TFLR

TFLR Risk / Return Rank: 77
TFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
TFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
TFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
TFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
TFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

GBIL vs. TFLR - 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 T. Rowe Price Floating Rate ETF (TFLR). 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	TFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	16.78	2.65	+14.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	104.00	3.92	+100.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	42.59	1.61	+40.98
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	191.21	2.42	+188.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1,621.11	11.05	+1,610.06

GBIL vs. TFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GBIL Sharpe Ratio is 16.78, which is higher than the TFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBIL and TFLR, 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

GBIL vs. TFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.76%, smaller than the maximum TFLR drawdown of -4.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBIL and TFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GBIL	TFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.76%	-4.01%	+3.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.02%	-2.18%	+2.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.76%	-4.01%	+3.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-0.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.20%	+0.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.04%	-0.22%	+0.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	0.48%	-0.48%

Volatility

GBIL vs. TFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) is 0.05%, while T. Rowe Price Floating Rate ETF (TFLR) has a volatility of 0.40%. This indicates that GBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GBIL	TFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.05%	0.40%	-0.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.14%	1.74%	-1.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23%	1.99%	-1.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.58%	3.65%	-3.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.47%	3.65%	-3.18%

GBIL vs. TFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBIL has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than TFLR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

GBIL vs. TFLR - Dividend Comparison

GBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, less than TFLR's 6.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
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%
TFLR T. Rowe Price Floating Rate ETF	6.77%	6.93%	8.18%	7.76%	0.58%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GBIL and TFLR in my portfolio?

GBIL and TFLR 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.

Which is riskier, GBIL or TFLR?

TFLR has higher volatility (0.40%) compared to GBIL (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBIL dropped -0.76% vs TFLR's -4.01%.

Which ETF is better, GBIL or TFLR?

On 3-year performance, TFLR leads with 7.75% vs 4.59% for GBIL. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GBIL or TFLR?

Over the 3-year period, TFLR has performed better with a 7.75% return vs 4.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GBIL or TFLR?

GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for TFLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GBIL or TFLR?

TFLR has the higher dividend yield at 6.77%, compared with 3.74% for GBIL.

What is the main difference between GBIL and TFLR?

GBIL is categorized as Government Bonds, while TFLR is Bank Loan. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GBIL and 0.60% for TFLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.78 vs 2.65), 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.