GPRF vs. GSLC
GPRF (Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF) and GSLC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GPRF is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs US Preferred Stock and Hybrids Index, while GSLC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GPRF returned 6.57% vs 23.28% for GSLC. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GPRF charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for GSLC.
Performance
GPRF vs. GSLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GPRF achieves a 1.33% return, which is significantly lower than GSLC's 8.50% return.
GPRF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 6.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSLC
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- 4.52%
- YTD
- 8.50%
- 6M
- 8.90%
- 1Y
- 23.28%
- 3Y*
- 20.85%
- 5Y*
- 12.70%
- 10Y*
- 14.64%
GPRF vs. GSLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
GPRF Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF | 1.33% | 6.17% | 2.34% |
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 8.50% | 16.17% | 8.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between GPRF and GSLC is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2024 | 0.41 |
GPRF vs. GSLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GPRF
GSLC
Financial Services
Real Estate
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
-
Financial Services
GPRF
GSLC
Real Estate
GPRF
GSLC
Utilities
GPRF
GSLC
Consumer Cyclical
GPRF
GSLC
Communication Services
GPRF
GSLC
Industrials
GPRF
GSLC
Basic Materials
GPRF
-
GSLC
Consumer Defensive
GPRF
-
GSLC
Energy
GPRF
-
GSLC
Healthcare
GPRF
-
GSLC
Technology
GPRF
-
GSLC
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
GPRF vs. GSLC — Risk / Return Rank
GPRF
GSLC
GPRF vs. GSLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF (GPRF) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC). 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.
| GPRF | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.76 | 2.00 | -0.24 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.50 | 2.76 | -0.26 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.36 | +0.01 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.57 | 2.46 | -0.89 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.51 | 10.96 | -3.45 |
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
| GPRF | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.76 | 2.00 | -0.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.77 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.83 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.37 | 0.82 | +0.56 |
Drawdowns
GPRF vs. GSLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GPRF drawdown since its inception was -4.36%, smaller than the maximum GSLC drawdown of -33.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPRF and GSLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GPRF | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.36% | -33.69% | +29.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.20% | -9.49% | +5.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.90% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.78% | -0.67% | -0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.89% | -4.39% | +3.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.88% | 2.13% | -1.25% |
Volatility
GPRF vs. GSLC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF (GPRF) is 0.78%, while Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) has a volatility of 2.74%. This indicates that GPRF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GPRF | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.78% | 2.74% | -1.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.13% | 8.84% | -5.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.76% | 11.72% | -7.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.94% | 16.62% | -12.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.94% | 17.68% | -13.74% |
GPRF vs. GSLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
GPRF has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than GSLC's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
GPRF vs. GSLC - Dividend Comparison
GPRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.65%, more than GSLC's 0.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GPRF Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF | 5.65% | 5.38% | 2.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 0.93% | 1.00% | 1.11% | 1.38% | 1.61% | 1.06% | 1.35% | 1.54% | 1.89% | 1.69% | 1.69% | 0.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GPRF and GSLC have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSLC has higher volatility (2.74%) compared to GPRF (0.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPRF dropped -4.36% vs GSLC's -33.69%.
On 1-year performance, GSLC leads with 23.28% vs 6.57% for GPRF. On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GPRF has been the lower-risk option at 0.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSLC has performed better with a 23.28% return vs 6.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSLC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for GPRF.
GPRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.65%, compared with 0.93% for GSLC.
GPRF is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while GSLC is Large Cap Growth Equities. GPRF tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs US Preferred Stock and Hybrids Index, while GSLC tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GPRF and 0.09% for GSLC.
GSLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.76), 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 GPRF and GSLC
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