GIGB vs. VEA
GIGB (Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and VEA (Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GIGB is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs Investment Grade Corporate Bond Index, while VEA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the FTSE Developed All Cap ex US Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GIGB returned 0.45%/yr vs 9.60%/yr for VEA. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GIGB charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VEA.
Performance
GIGB vs. VEA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GIGB achieves a 0.68% return, which is significantly lower than VEA's 14.92% return.
GIGB
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 0.63%
- YTD
- 0.68%
- 6M
- 0.43%
- 1Y
- 6.01%
- 3Y*
- 5.10%
- 5Y*
- 0.45%
- 10Y*
- —
VEA
- 1D
- -0.90%
- 1M
- 5.54%
- YTD
- 14.92%
- 6M
- 18.15%
- 1Y
- 32.48%
- 3Y*
- 19.77%
- 5Y*
- 9.60%
- 10Y*
- 10.17%
GIGB vs. VEA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GIGB Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.68% | 7.58% | 1.68% | 8.80% | -15.80% | -1.64% | 9.86% | 15.05% | -2.76% | 2.45% |
VEA Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF | 14.92% | 35.16% | 3.15% | 17.93% | -15.34% | 11.66% | 9.71% | 22.62% | -14.75% | 9.96% |
Correlation
The correlation between GIGB and VEA is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2017 | 0.25 |
Over the past year, GIGB and VEA have become more correlated (0.48) than their long-term average of 0.25, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
GIGB vs. VEA — Risk / Return Rank
GIGB
VEA
GIGB vs. VEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) and Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA). 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.
| GIGB | VEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.38 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.10 | 2.81 | -0.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.65 | 10.94 | -4.30 |
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
| GIGB | VEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.40 | 2.09 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 | 0.58 | -0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.59 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.25 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
GIGB vs. VEA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GIGB drawdown since its inception was -22.25%, smaller than the maximum VEA drawdown of -60.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIGB and VEA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GIGB | VEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.25% | -60.68% | +38.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.87% | -11.63% | +8.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.69% | -13.45% | +6.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.25% | -29.71% | +7.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.94% | -0.90% | -0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.62% | -13.29% | +7.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.91% | 2.98% | -2.07% |
Volatility
GIGB vs. VEA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) is 1.35%, while Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) has a volatility of 5.66%. This indicates that GIGB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GIGB | VEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.35% | 5.66% | -4.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.14% | 13.32% | -10.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.30% | 15.66% | -11.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.26% | 16.55% | -9.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.67% | 17.36% | -9.69% |
GIGB vs. VEA - Expense Ratio Comparison
GIGB has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is higher than VEA's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
GIGB vs. VEA - Dividend Comparison
GIGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.61%, more than VEA's 2.62% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GIGB Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.61% | 4.69% | 4.45% | 3.67% | 3.12% | 2.25% | 2.62% | 3.22% | 3.31% | 1.55% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VEA Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF | 2.62% | 3.22% | 3.35% | 3.15% | 2.91% | 3.16% | 2.04% | 3.04% | 3.35% | 2.77% | 3.05% | 2.92% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GIGB and VEA have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
VEA has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to GIGB (1.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIGB dropped -22.25% vs VEA's -60.68%.
On 5-year performance, VEA leads with 9.60% vs 0.45% for GIGB. On fees, VEA is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, GIGB has been the lower-risk option at 1.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, VEA has performed better with a 9.60% return vs 0.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VEA is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for GIGB.
GIGB has the higher dividend yield at 4.61%, compared with 2.62% for VEA.
GIGB is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while VEA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. GIGB tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Investment Grade Corporate Bond Index, while VEA tracks FTSE Developed All Cap ex US Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for GIGB and 0.03% for VEA.
VEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.40), 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 GIGB and VEA
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