PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GBIL vs. XES
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GBIL vs. XES - 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 SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services ETF (XES). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBIL achieves a 1.83% return, which is significantly lower than XES's 36.80% return.


GBIL

1D
0.01%
1M
0.29%
6M
1.71%
YTD
1.83%
1Y
3.82%
3Y*
4.58%
5Y*
3.40%
10Y*

XES

1D
-1.43%
1M
-4.61%
6M
21.54%
YTD
36.80%
1Y
78.38%
3Y*
9.81%
5Y*
17.17%
10Y*
-3.95%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GBIL vs. XES - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GBIL
Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF
1.83%4.12%5.24%4.91%1.05%-0.08%0.79%2.31%1.78%0.69%
XES
SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services ETF
36.80%5.89%-5.44%6.68%62.03%12.00%-43.38%-9.00%-46.99%-21.93%

Correlation

The correlation between GBIL and XES is -0.11, 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

-0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.07

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2016

-0.07

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. XES — Risk / Return Rank

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

GBIL
GBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
GBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
GBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
GBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
GBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank

XES
XES Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
XES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XES Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
XES Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XES Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
XES Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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. XES - 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 SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services ETF (XES). 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.


GBILXESDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+14.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+129.90

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

63.62

1.39

+62.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

192.18

3.81

+188.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2,029.86

13.29

+2,016.57

GBIL vs. XES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GBIL Sharpe Ratio is 17.01, which is higher than the XES Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBIL and XES, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

GBIL vs. XES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.76%, smaller than the maximum XES drawdown of -95.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBIL and XES.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GBILXESDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.76%

-95.65%

+94.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.02%

-20.69%

+20.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.76%

-45.95%

+45.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-0.76%

-45.95%

+45.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-91.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-73.58%

+73.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.04%

-54.46%

+54.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.00%

5.92%

-5.92%

Volatility

GBIL vs. XES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) is 0.06%, while SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services ETF (XES) has a volatility of 8.89%. This indicates that GBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GBILXESDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.06%

8.89%

-8.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.14%

21.23%

-21.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23%

30.68%

-30.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.58%

38.75%

-38.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.47%

44.84%

-44.37%

GBIL vs. XES - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBIL has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than XES's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

GBIL vs. XES - Dividend Comparison

GBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%, more than XES's 1.17% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GBIL
Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF
3.71%4.02%4.93%4.77%1.37%0.00%0.81%2.20%1.70%0.74%0.11%0.00%
XES
SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services ETF
1.17%1.69%1.31%0.66%0.36%1.81%1.33%1.43%1.14%1.68%0.64%2.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


GBIL and XES have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XES has higher volatility (8.89%) compared to GBIL (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBIL dropped -0.76% vs XES's -95.65%.

On 5-year performance, XES leads with 17.17% vs 3.40% for GBIL. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, XES has performed better with a 17.17% return vs 3.40%. 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 0.35% for XES.

GBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 1.17% for XES.

GBIL is categorized as Government Bonds, while XES is Energy Equities. GBIL tracks FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index, while XES tracks S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services Select Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GBIL and 0.35% for XES.

GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.01 vs 2.57), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GBIL and XES

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