GCAL vs. GVIP
GCAL (Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF) and GVIP (Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GCAL is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while GVIP is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs Hedge Fund VIP Index. GCAL is actively managed, while GVIP is passively managed. Over the past year, GCAL returned 4.85% vs 21.61% for GVIP. Their 0.05 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GCAL charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for GVIP.
Performance
GCAL vs. GVIP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GCAL achieves a 0.97% return, which is significantly lower than GVIP's 8.45% return.
GCAL
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- -1.25%
- 6M
- 0.25%
- YTD
- 0.97%
- 1Y
- 4.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.61%
GVIP
- 1D
- -0.64%
- 1M
- -6.63%
- 6M
- 5.72%
- YTD
- 8.45%
- 1Y
- 21.61%
- 3Y*
- 24.01%
- 5Y*
- 10.95%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.41%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.12M | $835.57K | $864.67K | |
| $2.23M | $1.88M | $2.26M |
GCAL vs. GVIP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF | 0.97% | 4.60% | 1.70% |
GVIP Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF | 8.45% | 25.27% | 14.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between GCAL and GVIP is 0.18, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2024 | 0.05 |
The correlation between GCAL and GVIP shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (all time) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. GVIP — Risk / Return Rank
GCAL
GVIP
GCAL vs. GVIP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) and Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF (GVIP). 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.
| GCAL | GVIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.78 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.16 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.38 | 1.20 | +1.18 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.24 | 4.60 | +3.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GCAL vs. GVIP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GCAL drawdown since its inception was -4.39%, smaller than the maximum GVIP drawdown of -37.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCAL and GVIP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GCAL | GVIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.39% | -37.09% | +32.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.24% | -16.36% | +14.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -37.09% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | -12.39% | +11.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.83% | -7.57% | +6.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.65% | 4.26% | -3.61% |
Volatility
GCAL vs. GVIP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) is 0.86%, while Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF (GVIP) has a volatility of 9.71%. This indicates that GCAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GVIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GCAL | GVIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.86% | 9.71% | -8.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.94% | 20.33% | -18.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.48% | 23.29% | -20.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.56% | 22.24% | -18.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.56% | 22.02% | -18.46% |
GCAL vs. GVIP - Expense Ratio Comparison
GCAL has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than GVIP's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
GCAL vs. GVIP - Dividend Comparison
GCAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.41%, more than GVIP's 0.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF | 3.30% | 3.06% | 1.41% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GVIP Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF | 0.31% | 0.34% | 0.29% | 0.77% | 0.02% | 0.00% | 0.12% | 0.77% | 0.44% | 0.45% | 0.08% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GCAL and GVIP have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GVIP has higher volatility (9.71%) compared to GCAL (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GCAL dropped -4.39% vs GVIP's -37.09%.
On 1-year performance, GVIP leads with 21.61% vs 4.85% for GCAL. On fees, GCAL is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, GCAL has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GVIP has performed better with a 21.61% return vs 4.85%. 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 0.45% for GVIP.
GCAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.30%, compared with 0.31% for GVIP.
GCAL is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while GVIP is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for GCAL and 0.45% for GVIP.
GCAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 0.84), 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 GVIP
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