GHMS vs. AINP

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) and Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP).

GHMS and AINP are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GHMS is an actively managed fund by Goose Hollow. It was launched on Nov 14, 2023. AINP is an actively managed fund by Allspring. It was launched on Dec 4, 2024.

Performance

GHMS vs. AINP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) and Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GHMS vs. AINP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GHMS Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF	0.00%	5.52%	-1.95%
AINP Allspring Income Plus ETF	-0.35%	7.53%	-1.24%

Returns By Period

GHMS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 0.00%
• 6M: -1.26%
• 1Y: 2.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AINP

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: -0.35%
• 6M: 0.96%
• 1Y: 4.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GHMS vs. AINP - Expense Ratio Comparison

GHMS has a 1.20% expense ratio, which is higher than AINP's 0.36% expense ratio.

GHMS

Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF

AINP

Allspring Income Plus ETF

Return for Risk

GHMS vs. AINP — Risk / Return Rank

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

GHMS

GHMS Risk / Return Rank: 34
GHMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
GHMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
GHMS Omega Ratio Rank: 30
GHMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GHMS Martin Ratio Rank: 40

AINP

AINP Risk / Return Rank: 71
AINP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
AINP Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
AINP Omega Ratio Rank: 69
AINP Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
AINP Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

GHMS vs. AINP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) and Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP). 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.

	GHMS	AINP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.57	1.30	-0.73
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.81	1.87	-1.06
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.26	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.22	2.01	-0.78
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.82	7.55	-3.72
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GHMS vs. AINP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GHMS Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is lower than the AINP Sharpe Ratio of 1.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GHMS and AINP, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GHMS	AINP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.57	1.30	-0.73
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.97	1.23	-0.25

Correlation

The correlation between GHMS and AINP is 0.34, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

GHMS vs. AINP - Dividend Comparison

GHMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, less than AINP's 5.50% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GHMS Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF	1.69%	1.69%	4.48%	0.29%
AINP Allspring Income Plus ETF	5.50%	5.03%	0.47%	0.00%

Drawdowns

GHMS vs. AINP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GHMS drawdown since its inception was -4.73%, which is greater than AINP's maximum drawdown of -2.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GHMS and AINP.

Drawdown Indicators

	GHMS	AINP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.73%	-2.61%	-2.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.61%	-2.51%	-2.10%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-1.56%	-0.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.11%	-0.45%	-0.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.50%	0.70%	+0.80%

Volatility

GHMS vs. AINP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) is 0.00%, while Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP) has a volatility of 1.56%. This indicates that GHMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AINP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GHMS	AINP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.00%	1.56%	-1.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.89%	2.22%	+1.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.65%	3.79%	+2.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.57%	3.63%	+1.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.57%	3.63%	+1.94%