GPIQ vs. META
GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) is Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while META (Meta Platforms, Inc.) is a stock. Over the past year, GPIQ returned 33.04% vs -15.84% for META. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
GPIQ vs. META - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GPIQ achieves a 14.88% return, which is significantly higher than META's -11.24% return.
GPIQ
- 1D
- 1.46%
- 1M
- 0.97%
- YTD
- 14.88%
- 6M
- 14.06%
- 1Y
- 33.04%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
META
- 1D
- -1.28%
- 1M
- -3.98%
- YTD
- -11.24%
- 6M
- -12.06%
- 1Y
- -15.84%
- 3Y*
- 30.58%
- 5Y*
- 12.31%
- 10Y*
- 17.60%
GPIQ vs. META - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF | 14.88% | 19.77% | 23.22% | 15.17% |
META Meta Platforms, Inc. | -11.24% | 13.09% | 66.05% | 18.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between GPIQ and META is 0.58, 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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2023 | 0.63 |
The correlation between GPIQ and META has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.63 - 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
GPIQ vs. META — Risk / Return Rank
GPIQ
META
GPIQ vs. META - 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 Meta Platforms, Inc. (META). 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 | META | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 0.94 | +0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.49 | -0.48 | +3.97 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.21 | -1.01 | +16.22 |
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
| GPIQ | META | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.36 | -0.45 | +2.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.67 | 0.54 | +1.13 |
Drawdowns
GPIQ vs. META - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GPIQ drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, smaller than the maximum META drawdown of -76.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPIQ and META.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GPIQ | META | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.06% | -76.74% | +55.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.51% | -33.30% | +23.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -34.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -76.74% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -76.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.08% | -25.73% | +22.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.27% | -15.26% | +12.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.18% | 15.69% | -13.51% |
Volatility
GPIQ vs. META - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) is 5.54%, while Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) has a volatility of 10.48%. This indicates that GPIQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than META based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GPIQ | META | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.54% | 10.48% | -4.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.32% | 26.95% | -15.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.07% | 35.56% | -21.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.63% | 44.05% | -26.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.63% | 38.69% | -21.06% |
Dividends
GPIQ vs. META - Dividend Comparison
GPIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.60%, more than META's 0.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF | 9.60% | 9.81% | 9.18% | 1.74% |
META Meta Platforms, Inc. | 0.36% | 0.32% | 0.34% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GPIQ and META have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
META has higher volatility (10.48%) compared to GPIQ (5.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPIQ dropped -21.06% vs META's -76.74%.
GPIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs -0.45), 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 GPIQ and META
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