GNMA vs. SMBS
GNMA (iShares GNMA Bond ETF) and SMBS (Schwab Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF) are both Mortgage Backed Securities funds - GNMA tracks the Barclays Capital GNMA Index while SMBS tracks the Bloomberg US MBS Float Adjusted Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GNMA returned 6.56% vs 6.78% for SMBS. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GNMA charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SMBS.
Performance
GNMA vs. SMBS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GNMA achieves a 0.56% return, which is significantly lower than SMBS's 0.70% return.
GNMA
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -0.07%
- YTD
- 0.56%
- 6M
- 0.81%
- 1Y
- 6.56%
- 3Y*
- 4.20%
- 5Y*
- 0.53%
- 10Y*
- 1.23%
SMBS
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 0.33%
- YTD
- 0.70%
- 6M
- 0.82%
- 1Y
- 6.78%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GNMA vs. SMBS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
GNMA iShares GNMA Bond ETF | 0.56% | 8.25% | -0.27% |
SMBS Schwab Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF | 0.70% | 8.15% | -0.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between GNMA and SMBS is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2024 | 0.83 |
The correlation between GNMA and SMBS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GNMA vs. SMBS — Risk / Return Rank
GNMA
SMBS
GNMA vs. SMBS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) and Schwab Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (SMBS). 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.
| GNMA | SMBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.30 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.52 | 2.41 | +0.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.05 | 8.21 | -0.16 |
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
| GNMA | SMBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.53 | 1.64 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.24 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 1.18 | -0.93 |
Drawdowns
GNMA vs. SMBS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GNMA drawdown since its inception was -17.09%, which is greater than SMBS's maximum drawdown of -3.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNMA and SMBS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GNMA | SMBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.09% | -3.20% | -13.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.61% | -2.83% | +0.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.13% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.83% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.09% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.41% | -1.33% | -0.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.66% | -0.84% | -2.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.82% | 0.83% | -0.01% |
Volatility
GNMA vs. SMBS - Volatility Comparison
iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) and Schwab Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (SMBS) have volatilities of 1.54% and 1.55%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GNMA | SMBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.54% | 1.55% | -0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.14% | 3.03% | +0.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.30% | 4.15% | +0.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.61% | 4.86% | +1.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.13% | 4.86% | +0.27% |
GNMA vs. SMBS - Expense Ratio Comparison
GNMA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than SMBS'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
GNMA vs. SMBS - Dividend Comparison
GNMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.24%, less than SMBS's 5.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GNMA iShares GNMA Bond ETF | 4.24% | 4.19% | 4.15% | 3.43% | 2.01% | 0.64% | 1.89% | 2.61% | 2.41% | 2.15% | 1.89% | 1.50% |
SMBS Schwab Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF | 5.17% | 4.83% | 0.50% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GNMA and SMBS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMBS has higher volatility (1.55%) compared to GNMA (1.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNMA dropped -17.09% vs SMBS's -3.20%.
On 1-year performance, SMBS leads with 6.78% vs 6.56% for GNMA. On fees, SMBS is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SMBS has performed better with a 6.78% return vs 6.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMBS is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for GNMA.
SMBS has the higher dividend yield at 5.17%, compared with 4.24% for GNMA.
GNMA tracks Barclays Capital GNMA Index, while SMBS tracks Bloomberg US MBS Float Adjusted Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for GNMA and 0.03% for SMBS.
SMBS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 1.53), 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 GNMA and SMBS
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