PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GIND vs. ADIV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GIND vs. ADIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) and SmartETFs Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GIND achieves a -11.06% return, which is significantly lower than ADIV's 8.00% return.


GIND

1D
0.14%
1M
-1.64%
YTD
-11.06%
6M
-10.81%
1Y
-13.09%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

ADIV

1D
-1.20%
1M
4.12%
YTD
8.00%
6M
7.65%
1Y
19.14%
3Y*
17.71%
5Y*
6.49%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GIND vs. ADIV - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between GIND and ADIV is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025

0.48

GIND vs. ADIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GIND
ADIV

Financial Services

28.9%
32.4%

Consumer Cyclical

15.9%
16.3%

Industrials

10.7%
2.4%

Basic Materials

9.2%

-

Technology

9.0%
25.5%

Healthcare

8.8%
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

5.7%
4.7%

Energy

4.1%

-

Utilities

2.9%
2.5%

Communication Services

2.8%
2.7%

Real Estate

2.2%
7.9%

Financial Services

GIND
28.9%
ADIV
32.4%

Consumer Cyclical

GIND
15.9%
ADIV
16.3%

Industrials

GIND
10.7%
ADIV
2.4%

Basic Materials

GIND
9.2%
ADIV

-

Technology

GIND
9.0%
ADIV
25.5%

Healthcare

GIND
8.8%
ADIV
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

GIND
5.7%
ADIV
4.7%

Energy

GIND
4.1%
ADIV

-

Utilities

GIND
2.9%
ADIV
2.5%

Communication Services

GIND
2.8%
ADIV
2.7%

Real Estate

GIND
2.2%
ADIV
7.9%

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

GIND vs. ADIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

GIND
GIND Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
GIND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GIND Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
GIND Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
GIND Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
GIND Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

ADIV
ADIV Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
ADIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ADIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
ADIV Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
ADIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
ADIV Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GIND vs. ADIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) and SmartETFs Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV). 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.


GINDADIVDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.81

1.43

-2.24

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-1.12

2.03

-3.15

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.87

1.26

-0.38

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.56

1.89

-2.46

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-1.37

6.27

-7.64

GIND vs. ADIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIND Sharpe Ratio is -0.81, which is lower than the ADIV Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIND and ADIV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GINDADIVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.81

1.43

-2.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.36

0.42

-0.78

Drawdowns

GIND vs. ADIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIND drawdown since its inception was -22.97%, smaller than the maximum ADIV drawdown of -31.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIND and ADIV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GINDADIVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.97%

-31.55%

+8.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.97%

-10.15%

-12.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.68%

-1.20%

-14.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.81%

-8.45%

+1.64%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.46%

3.06%

+6.40%

Volatility

GIND vs. ADIV - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) has a higher volatility of 5.66% compared to SmartETFs Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) at 4.35%. This indicates that GIND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ADIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GINDADIVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.66%

4.35%

+1.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.98%

10.54%

+3.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.17%

13.49%

+2.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.10%

16.48%

+0.62%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.10%

16.37%

+0.73%

GIND vs. ADIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

GIND has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than ADIV's 0.78% expense ratio.


Dividends

GIND vs. ADIV - Dividend Comparison

GIND has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ADIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
ADIV
SmartETFs Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF
2.79%2.77%4.83%4.55%2.98%13.85%
GIND
Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GIND and ADIV have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GIND has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to ADIV (4.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIND dropped -22.97% vs ADIV's -31.55%.

On 1-year performance, ADIV leads with 19.14% vs -13.09% for GIND. On fees, GIND is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, ADIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ADIV has performed better with a 19.14% return vs -13.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GIND is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for ADIV.

ADIV has the higher dividend yield at 2.79%, compared with 0.00% for GIND.

They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Guinness Atkinson Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GIND and 0.78% for ADIV.

ADIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs -0.81), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GIND and ADIV

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