GCAL vs. BESF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GCAL (Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF) and BESF (Bastion Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GCAL is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while BESF is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Bastion. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.21, they often move in opposite directions. GCAL charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for BESF.

Performance

GCAL vs. BESF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) and Bastion Energy ETF (BESF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GCAL achieves a 1.59% return, which is significantly lower than BESF's 19.74% return.

GCAL

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 0.69%
• YTD: 1.59%
• 6M: 2.03%
• 1Y: 6.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BESF

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -4.08%
• YTD: 19.74%
• 6M: 21.51%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GCAL vs. BESF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF	1.59%	4.96%
BESF Bastion Energy ETF	19.74%	41.15%

Correlation

The correlation between GCAL and BESF is -0.21, 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 Jun 5, 2025	-0.22

Return for Risk

GCAL vs. BESF — Risk / Return Rank

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

GCAL

GCAL Risk / Return Rank: 78
GCAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
GCAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GCAL Omega Ratio Rank: 91
GCAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
GCAL Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

GCAL vs. BESF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) and Bastion Energy ETF (BESF). 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.

	GCAL	BESF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.83	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.08	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.15	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GCAL	BESF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.83	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.18	2.87	-1.70

Drawdowns

GCAL vs. BESF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GCAL drawdown since its inception was -4.39%, smaller than the maximum BESF drawdown of -9.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCAL and BESF.

Drawdown Indicators

	GCAL	BESF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.39%	-9.89%	+5.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-5.88%	+5.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.87%	-2.45%	+1.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.62%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GCAL	BESF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.73%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.75%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.44%	24.33%	-21.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.63%	24.33%	-20.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.63%	24.33%	-20.70%

GCAL vs. BESF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GCAL has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than BESF's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

GCAL vs. BESF - Dividend Comparison

GCAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, less than BESF's 5.68% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BESF Bastion Energy ETF	5.68%	6.39%	0.00%
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF	3.32%	3.06%	1.41%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GCAL and BESF in my portfolio?

GCAL and BESF have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GCAL or BESF?

On fees, GCAL is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GCAL or BESF?

GCAL is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for BESF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GCAL or BESF?

BESF has the higher dividend yield at 5.68%, compared with 3.32% for GCAL.

What is the main difference between GCAL and BESF?

GCAL is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while BESF is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Bastion. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for GCAL and 0.80% for BESF.