GCAL vs. GSG
GCAL (Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - GCAL is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. GCAL is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, GCAL returned 6.88% vs 51.52% for GSG. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. GCAL charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
GCAL vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GCAL achieves a 1.59% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return.
GCAL
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.69%
- YTD
- 1.59%
- 6M
- 2.03%
- 1Y
- 6.88%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -4.83%
- YTD
- 42.58%
- 6M
- 41.06%
- 1Y
- 51.52%
- 3Y*
- 19.31%
- 5Y*
- 15.74%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
GCAL vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF | 1.59% | 4.60% | 1.65% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 42.58% | 5.93% | 1.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between GCAL and GSG is -0.26, 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 | -0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2024 | -0.19 |
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
GCAL vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
GCAL
GSG
GCAL vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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 | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.59 | 1.40 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.08 | 5.47 | -2.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.15 | 14.39 | -3.24 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GCAL | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.83 | 2.26 | +0.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.18 | -0.09 | +1.26 |
Drawdowns
GCAL vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GCAL drawdown since its inception was -4.39%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCAL and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GCAL | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.39% | -89.62% | +85.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.24% | -9.46% | +7.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.32% | -56.95% | +56.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.87% | -63.71% | +62.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.62% | 3.59% | -2.97% |
Volatility
GCAL vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) is 0.73%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.65%. This indicates that GCAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GCAL | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.73% | 7.65% | -6.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.75% | 20.42% | -18.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.44% | 22.95% | -20.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 22.61% | -18.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 22.03% | -18.40% |
GCAL vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
GCAL has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GCAL vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
GCAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF | 3.32% | 3.06% | 1.41% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GCAL and GSG have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to GCAL (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GCAL dropped -4.39% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 51.52% vs 6.88% for GCAL. On fees, GCAL is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, GCAL has been the lower-risk option at 0.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSG has performed better with a 51.52% return vs 6.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GCAL is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
GCAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.32%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
GCAL is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for GCAL and 0.75% for GSG.
GCAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 2.26), 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 GCAL and GSG
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