GPIQ vs. FLRT

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and FLRT (Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GPIQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while FLRT is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by Pacific Life. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GPIQ returned 33.04% vs 5.76% for FLRT. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GPIQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for FLRT.

Performance

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GPIQ achieves a 14.88% return, which is significantly higher than FLRT's 1.66% return.

GPIQ

• 1D: 1.46%
• 1M: 0.97%
• YTD: 14.88%
• 6M: 14.06%
• 1Y: 33.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLRT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.66%
• 6M: 2.14%
• 1Y: 5.76%
• 3Y*: 8.70%
• 5Y*: 5.93%
• 10Y*: 4.84%

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

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	14.88%	19.77%	23.22%	15.38%
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF	1.66%	6.24%	9.18%	3.92%

Correlation

The correlation between GPIQ and FLRT is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2023	0.29

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GPIQ	FLRT
Technology	53.8%	-
Communication Services	15.8%	0.8%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	-
Healthcare	4.2%	-
Industrials	2.9%	-
Utilities	1.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.1%	-
Energy	0.6%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	99.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

GPIQ vs. FLRT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GPIQ

GPIQ Risk / Return Rank: 79
GPIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
GPIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
GPIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 80
GPIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
GPIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 83

FLRT

FLRT Risk / Return Rank: 86
FLRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
FLRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
FLRT Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FLRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
FLRT Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). 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.

	GPIQ	FLRT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	3.65	-1.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	5.62	-2.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.87	-0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.49	3.26	+0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.21	11.94	+3.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPIQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is lower than the FLRT Sharpe Ratio of 3.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPIQ and FLRT, 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

	GPIQ	FLRT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.36	3.65	-1.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	2.59	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.67	0.75	+0.93

Drawdowns

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPIQ drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, roughly equal to the maximum FLRT drawdown of -20.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPIQ and FLRT.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPIQ	FLRT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.06%	-20.96%	-0.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.51%	-1.78%	-7.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-2.87%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-7.60%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.08%	-0.32%	-2.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.27%	-1.41%	-0.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.18%	0.48%	+1.70%

Volatility

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) has a higher volatility of 5.54% compared to Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT) at 0.44%. This indicates that GPIQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GPIQ	FLRT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.54%	0.44%	+5.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.32%	1.21%	+10.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.07%	1.59%	+12.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.63%	2.30%	+15.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.63%	6.15%	+11.48%

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPIQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than FLRT's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPIQ vs. FLRT - Dividend Comparison

GPIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.60%, more than FLRT's 6.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF	6.82%	6.93%	7.93%	8.40%	5.81%	3.16%	3.52%	4.30%	3.95%	3.20%	3.38%	3.21%
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	9.60%	9.81%	9.18%	1.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GPIQ and FLRT in my portfolio?

GPIQ and FLRT have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GPIQ or FLRT?

GPIQ has higher volatility (5.54%) compared to FLRT (0.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPIQ dropped -21.06% vs FLRT's -20.96%.

Which ETF is better, GPIQ or FLRT?

On 1-year performance, GPIQ leads with 33.04% vs 5.76% for FLRT. On fees, GPIQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FLRT has been the lower-risk option at 0.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GPIQ or FLRT?

Over the 1-year period, GPIQ has performed better with a 33.04% return vs 5.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GPIQ or FLRT?

GPIQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for FLRT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GPIQ or FLRT?

GPIQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.60%, compared with 6.82% for FLRT.

What is the main difference between GPIQ and FLRT?

GPIQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FLRT is High Yield Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Pacific Life. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for GPIQ and 0.69% for FLRT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.65 vs 2.36), 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.