GCEBX vs. GSBFX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GCEBX (Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares) and GSBFX (Goldman Sachs Income Builder Fund) are both mutual funds - GCEBX is a Alternative Energy Equities fund managed by Goldman Sachs, while GSBFX is a Diversified Portfolio fund managed by Goldman Sachs. Over the past 5 years, GCEBX returned 3.97%/yr vs 5.44%/yr for GSBFX. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GCEBX charges 1.26%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GSBFX.

Performance

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares (GCEBX) and Goldman Sachs Income Builder Fund (GSBFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GCEBX achieves a 26.99% return, which is significantly higher than GSBFX's 4.84% return.

GCEBX

• 1D: -0.84%
• 1M: 1.65%
• YTD: 26.99%
• 6M: 26.42%
• 1Y: 54.52%
• 3Y*: 10.69%
• 5Y*: 3.97%
• 10Y*: —

GSBFX

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 1.25%
• YTD: 4.84%
• 6M: 5.08%
• 1Y: 13.13%
• 3Y*: 10.80%
• 5Y*: 5.44%
• 10Y*: 6.98%

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

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GCEBX Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares	26.99%	39.79%	-14.20%	-14.97%	-11.37%	-2.89%	46.85%
GSBFX Goldman Sachs Income Builder Fund	4.84%	10.42%	9.32%	9.64%	-9.53%	10.50%	13.76%

Correlation

The correlation between GCEBX and GSBFX is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2020	0.63

The correlation between GCEBX and GSBFX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GCEBX vs. GSBFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GCEBX

GCEBX Risk / Return Rank: 91
GCEBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
GCEBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
GCEBX Omega Ratio Rank: 82
GCEBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
GCEBX Martin Ratio Rank: 96

GSBFX

GSBFX Risk / Return Rank: 68
GSBFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
GSBFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
GSBFX Omega Ratio Rank: 67
GSBFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
GSBFX Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares (GCEBX) and Goldman Sachs Income Builder Fund (GSBFX). 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.

	GCEBX	GSBFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.25	2.44	+0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.10	3.51	+0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.46	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.94	3.02	+5.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.07	13.13	+9.94
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GCEBX Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is higher than the GSBFX Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GCEBX and GSBFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GCEBX	GSBFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.25	2.44	+0.81
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21	0.74	-0.53
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.88	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.70	-0.25

Drawdowns

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GCEBX drawdown since its inception was -45.74%, which is greater than GSBFX's maximum drawdown of -37.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCEBX and GSBFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GCEBX	GSBFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.74%	-37.04%	-8.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.16%	-4.44%	-1.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.96%	-8.14%	-19.82%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.51%	-15.94%	-25.57%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-23.42%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.84%	-0.36%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.68%	-4.18%	-18.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.38%	1.02%	+1.36%

Volatility

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares (GCEBX) has a higher volatility of 6.08% compared to Goldman Sachs Income Builder Fund (GSBFX) at 1.71%. This indicates that GCEBX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSBFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GCEBX	GSBFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.08%	1.71%	+4.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.06%	4.46%	+8.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.94%	5.50%	+11.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.23%	7.41%	+11.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.24%	7.99%	+11.25%

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GCEBX has a 1.26% expense ratio, which is higher than GSBFX's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

GCEBX vs. GSBFX - Dividend Comparison

GCEBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, less than GSBFX's 5.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GCEBX Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares	1.11%	1.41%	2.61%	2.98%	0.56%	6.08%	0.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GSBFX Goldman Sachs Income Builder Fund	5.11%	4.39%	5.12%	3.41%	4.10%	6.66%	3.05%	3.52%	3.98%	3.52%	3.78%	3.93%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GCEBX and GSBFX in my portfolio?

GCEBX and GSBFX have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GCEBX or GSBFX?

GCEBX has higher volatility (6.08%) compared to GSBFX (1.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GCEBX dropped -45.74% vs GSBFX's -37.04%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCEBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs 2.44), 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.