GPRF vs. TSCM
GPRF (Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF) and TSCM (TimesSquare Quality Mid Cap Growth 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 TSCM is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TimesSquare Capital Management. GPRF is passively managed, while TSCM is actively managed. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GPRF charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for TSCM.
Performance
GPRF vs. TSCM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GPRF achieves a 1.33% return, which is significantly lower than TSCM's 3.31% return.
GPRF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 6.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TSCM
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- 5.27%
- YTD
- 3.31%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GPRF vs. TSCM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GPRF Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF | 1.33% | 0.00% |
TSCM TimesSquare Quality Mid Cap Growth ETF | 3.31% | -0.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between GPRF and TSCM is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 31, 2025 | 0.31 |
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. TSCM — Risk / Return Rank
GPRF
TSCM
GPRF vs. TSCM - 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 TimesSquare Quality Mid Cap Growth ETF (TSCM). 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 | TSCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.57 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.51 | — | — |
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 | TSCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.76 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.37 | 0.28 | +1.10 |
Drawdowns
GPRF vs. TSCM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GPRF drawdown since its inception was -4.36%, smaller than the maximum TSCM drawdown of -14.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPRF and TSCM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GPRF | TSCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.36% | -14.87% | +10.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.78% | -0.92% | +0.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.89% | -6.33% | +5.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.88% | — | — |
Volatility
GPRF vs. TSCM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GPRF | TSCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.78% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.13% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.76% | 21.03% | -17.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.94% | 21.03% | -17.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.94% | 21.03% | -17.09% |
GPRF vs. TSCM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GPRF has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than TSCM's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
GPRF vs. TSCM - Dividend Comparison
GPRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.65%, while TSCM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GPRF Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF | 5.65% | 5.38% | 2.10% |
TSCM TimesSquare Quality Mid Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GPRF and TSCM have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GPRF is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GPRF is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for TSCM.
GPRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.65%, compared with 0.00% for TSCM.
GPRF is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while TSCM is Mid Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and TimesSquare Capital Management. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GPRF and 0.55% for TSCM.
Find the right allocation for GPRF and TSCM
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