GK vs. CWS
GK (AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF) and CWS (AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds from AdvisorShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GK returned 18.34%/yr vs 9.20%/yr for CWS. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GK charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for CWS.
Performance
GK vs. CWS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GK achieves a 13.03% return, which is significantly higher than CWS's -2.08% return.
GK
- 1D
- -2.88%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- YTD
- 13.03%
- 6M
- 11.47%
- 1Y
- 27.18%
- 3Y*
- 18.34%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CWS
- 1D
- -0.50%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- -2.08%
- 6M
- -3.85%
- 1Y
- -1.44%
- 3Y*
- 9.20%
- 5Y*
- 8.12%
- 10Y*
- —
GK vs. CWS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GK AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF | 13.03% | 17.78% | 20.10% | 21.19% | -42.76% | 4.61% |
CWS AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF | -2.08% | 6.43% | 9.82% | 25.06% | -10.42% | 13.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between GK and CWS is 0.51, 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 | 0.51 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2021 | 0.66 |
The correlation between GK and CWS shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.66 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GK vs. CWS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GK
CWS
Technology
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
Financial Services
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
-
-
Energy
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
GK
CWS
Industrials
GK
CWS
Communication Services
GK
CWS
-
Healthcare
GK
CWS
Financial Services
GK
CWS
Utilities
GK
CWS
Consumer Cyclical
GK
CWS
Consumer Defensive
GK
CWS
Basic Materials
GK
-
CWS
-
Energy
GK
-
CWS
-
Real Estate
GK
-
CWS
-
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
GK vs. CWS — Risk / Return Rank
GK
CWS
GK vs. CWS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF (GK) and AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| GK | CWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 0.99 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.80 | -0.12 | +1.93 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.74 | -0.30 | +7.04 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GK vs. CWS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GK drawdown since its inception was -47.72%, which is greater than CWS's maximum drawdown of -33.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GK and CWS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GK | CWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.72% | -33.82% | -13.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.13% | -11.92% | -3.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.62% | -16.56% | -7.06% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.87% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.03% | -6.49% | +2.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.77% | -4.55% | -19.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.04% | 4.77% | -0.73% |
Volatility
GK vs. CWS - Volatility Comparison
AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF (GK) has a higher volatility of 8.10% compared to AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) at 3.70%. This indicates that GK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CWS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GK | CWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.10% | 3.70% | +4.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.03% | 10.41% | +4.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.71% | 13.48% | +5.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.02% | 15.68% | +8.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.02% | 16.89% | +7.13% |
GK vs. CWS - Expense Ratio Comparison
GK has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than CWS's 0.77% expense ratio.
Dividends
GK vs. CWS - Dividend Comparison
GK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than CWS's 0.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWS AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF | 0.31% | 0.31% | 0.59% | 0.25% | 0.50% | 0.16% | 0.27% | 0.39% | 2.07% | 0.29% | 0.03% |
GK AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF | 0.07% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.13% | 1.30% | 0.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GK and CWS have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GK has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to CWS (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GK dropped -47.72% vs CWS's -33.82%.
On 3-year performance, GK leads with 18.34% vs 9.20% for CWS. On fees, GK is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, CWS has been the lower-risk option at 3.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GK has performed better with a 18.34% return vs 9.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GK is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for CWS.
CWS has the higher dividend yield at 0.31%, compared with 0.07% for GK.
Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GK and 0.77% for CWS.
GK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs -0.11), 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 GK and CWS
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