GJRTX vs. GCIIX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GJRTX (Goldman Sachs Absolute Return Tracker Fund Institutional Class) and GCIIX (Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights Fund) are both mutual funds - GJRTX is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while GCIIX is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund managed by Goldman Sachs. Over the past 10 years, GJRTX returned 5.65%/yr vs 10.97%/yr for GCIIX. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GJRTX charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for GCIIX.

Performance

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Absolute Return Tracker Fund Institutional Class (GJRTX) and Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights Fund (GCIIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GJRTX achieves a 6.72% return, which is significantly lower than GCIIX's 12.60% return. Over the past 10 years, GJRTX has underperformed GCIIX with an annualized return of 5.65%, while GCIIX has yielded a comparatively higher 10.97% annualized return.

GJRTX

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 2.88%
• YTD: 6.72%
• 6M: 7.19%
• 1Y: 15.01%
• 3Y*: 9.68%
• 5Y*: 5.77%
• 10Y*: 5.65%

GCIIX

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 6.07%
• YTD: 12.60%
• 6M: 15.21%
• 1Y: 30.53%
• 3Y*: 24.19%
• 5Y*: 12.23%
• 10Y*: 10.97%

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

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GJRTX Goldman Sachs Absolute Return Tracker Fund Institutional Class	6.72%	9.71%	7.04%	10.82%	-6.26%	6.45%	3.61%	10.91%	-2.47%	7.46%
GCIIX Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights Fund	12.60%	40.72%	9.65%	20.80%	-14.91%	11.71%	7.83%	18.52%	-15.82%	29.65%

Correlation

The correlation between GJRTX and GCIIX is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2009	0.82

The correlation between GJRTX and GCIIX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GJRTX vs. GCIIX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GJRTX

GJRTX Risk / Return Rank: 80
GJRTX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
GJRTX Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
GJRTX Omega Ratio Rank: 78
GJRTX Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
GJRTX Martin Ratio Rank: 83

GCIIX

GCIIX Risk / Return Rank: 43
GCIIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
GCIIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
GCIIX Omega Ratio Rank: 43
GCIIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
GCIIX Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Absolute Return Tracker Fund Institutional Class (GJRTX) and Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights Fund (GCIIX). 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.

	GJRTX	GCIIX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	1.96	+0.68
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.76	2.72	+1.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.35	+0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	2.43	+1.13
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.51	9.08	+6.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GJRTX Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is higher than the GCIIX Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GJRTX and GCIIX, 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

	GJRTX	GCIIX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	1.96	+0.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87	0.76	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.88	0.66	+0.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.32	+0.38

Drawdowns

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GJRTX drawdown since its inception was -13.23%, smaller than the maximum GCIIX drawdown of -61.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GJRTX and GCIIX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GJRTX	GCIIX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.23%	-61.08%	+47.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.28%	-12.33%	+8.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.48%	-13.25%	+4.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.82%	-30.58%	+19.76%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-13.23%	-39.85%	+26.62%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.21%	-15.04%	+12.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.98%	3.29%	-2.31%

Volatility

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Absolute Return Tracker Fund Institutional Class (GJRTX) is 1.51%, while Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights Fund (GCIIX) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that GJRTX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCIIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GJRTX	GCIIX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.51%	4.87%	-3.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.53%	12.70%	-8.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.77%	15.30%	-9.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.70%	16.11%	-9.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.48%	16.79%	-10.31%

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GJRTX has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than GCIIX's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

GJRTX vs. GCIIX - Dividend Comparison

GJRTX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.99%, less than GCIIX's 6.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GCIIX Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights Fund	6.91%	7.78%	9.24%	2.81%	3.94%	6.33%	1.86%	2.46%	1.94%	1.62%	2.51%	1.45%
GJRTX Goldman Sachs Absolute Return Tracker Fund Institutional Class	1.99%	2.13%	1.14%	2.71%	5.24%	8.88%	0.61%	3.60%	2.69%	3.52%	0.64%	1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GJRTX and GCIIX in my portfolio?

GJRTX and GCIIX have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GJRTX or GCIIX?

GCIIX has higher volatility (4.87%) compared to GJRTX (1.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GJRTX dropped -13.23% vs GCIIX's -61.08%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GJRTX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 1.96), 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.