GBPG.L vs. GIN.L
Compare and contrast key facts about Goldman Sachs Access UK Gilts 1-10 Years UCITS ETF Class GBP (Dist) (GBPG.L) and SPDR Morningstar Multi-Asset Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF (GIN.L).
GBPG.L and GIN.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GBPG.L is a passively managed fund by Goldman Sachs that tracks the performance of the FTSE Act UK Cnvt Gilts All Stocks TR GBP. It was launched on Sep 7, 2021. GIN.L is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the Morningstar EAA USD Mod Tgt Alloc NR USD. It was launched on Apr 14, 2015. Both GBPG.L and GIN.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: GBPG.L or GIN.L.
Key characteristics
| GBPG.L | GIN.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | -0.20% | 3.09% |
| 1Y Return | 3.73% | 9.06% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 25.51% | 0.26% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.75 | 0.85 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.09 | 1.28 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.13 | 1.15 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.01 | 0.76 |
| Martin Ratio | 2.26 | 4.52 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.31% | 1.64% |
| Daily Std Dev | 4.03% | 8.79% |
| Max Drawdown | -7.18% | -15.71% |
| Current Drawdown | -2.57% | -2.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between GBPG.L and GIN.L is 0.57, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
GBPG.L vs. GIN.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, GBPG.L achieves a -0.20% return, which is significantly lower than GIN.L's 3.09% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
GBPG.L vs. GIN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
GBPG.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than GIN.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
GBPG.L vs. GIN.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access UK Gilts 1-10 Years UCITS ETF Class GBP (Dist) (GBPG.L) and SPDR Morningstar Multi-Asset Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF (GIN.L). 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.
Dividends
GBPG.L vs. GIN.L - Dividend Comparison
GBPG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, while GIN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBPG.L Goldman Sachs Access UK Gilts 1-10 Years UCITS ETF Class GBP (Dist) | 4.12% | 3.35% | 62.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GIN.L SPDR Morningstar Multi-Asset Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 2.80% | 2.47% | 87.23% | 2.23% | 2.37% | 2.16% | 2.30% | 2.17% | 1.81% |
Drawdowns
GBPG.L vs. GIN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GBPG.L drawdown since its inception was -7.18%, smaller than the maximum GIN.L drawdown of -15.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBPG.L and GIN.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
GBPG.L vs. GIN.L - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs Access UK Gilts 1-10 Years UCITS ETF Class GBP (Dist) (GBPG.L) has a higher volatility of 2.71% compared to SPDR Morningstar Multi-Asset Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF (GIN.L) at 2.42%. This indicates that GBPG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GIN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.