PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GNMA vs. MBS
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

GNMA vs. MBS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

GNMA vs. MBS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
GNMA
iShares GNMA Bond ETF
0.45%8.25%3.25%
MBS
Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF
0.52%8.13%5.78%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GNMA achieves a 0.45% return, which is significantly lower than MBS's 0.52% return.


GNMA

1D
0.23%
1M
-1.26%
YTD
0.45%
6M
1.88%
1Y
5.35%
3Y*
4.05%
5Y*
0.45%
10Y*
1.27%

MBS

1D
0.23%
1M
-1.56%
YTD
0.52%
6M
1.97%
1Y
5.72%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


GNMA vs. MBS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNMA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MBS's 0.49% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

GNMA vs. MBS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNMA
GNMA Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
GNMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GNMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
GNMA Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
GNMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
GNMA Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

MBS
MBS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
MBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
MBS Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
MBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
MBS Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
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.

GNMA vs. MBS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). 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.


GNMAMBSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.12

1.61

-0.48

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.63

2.19

-0.56

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.31

-0.10

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.90

2.21

-0.30

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.64

6.13

-0.49

GNMA vs. MBS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the MBS Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNMA and MBS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GNMAMBSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.12

1.61

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.25

1.68

-1.43

Correlation

The correlation between GNMA and MBS is 0.65, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Dividends

GNMA vs. MBS - Dividend Comparison

GNMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.21%, less than MBS's 5.46% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GNMA
iShares GNMA Bond ETF
4.21%4.19%4.15%3.43%2.01%0.64%1.89%2.61%2.41%2.15%1.89%1.50%
MBS
Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF
5.46%5.28%4.52%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

GNMA vs. MBS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNMA drawdown since its inception was -17.09%, which is greater than MBS's maximum drawdown of -4.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNMA and MBS.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


GNMAMBSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.09%

-4.09%

-13.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.93%

-2.54%

-0.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.52%

-1.56%

+0.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.69%

-1.00%

-2.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

0.91%

+0.08%

Volatility

GNMA vs. MBS - Volatility Comparison

iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) has a higher volatility of 1.79% compared to Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) at 1.03%. This indicates that GNMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MBS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


GNMAMBSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.79%

1.03%

+0.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.76%

2.03%

+0.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.78%

3.58%

+1.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.56%

4.08%

+2.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.11%

4.08%

+1.03%