GS vs. IBTJ
GS (The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.) is a stock, while IBTJ (iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF) is Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Treasury Index. Over the past 5 years, GS returned 25.98%/yr vs -0.15%/yr for IBTJ. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions.
Performance
GS vs. IBTJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GS achieves a 22.08% return, which is significantly higher than IBTJ's 0.04% return.
GS
- 1D
- 2.62%
- 1M
- 12.54%
- YTD
- 22.08%
- 6M
- 20.84%
- 1Y
- 76.70%
- 3Y*
- 49.31%
- 5Y*
- 25.98%
- 10Y*
- 24.48%
IBTJ
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 0.36%
- YTD
- 0.04%
- 6M
- 0.37%
- 1Y
- 3.40%
- 3Y*
- 3.81%
- 5Y*
- -0.15%
- 10Y*
- —
GS vs. IBTJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GS The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. | 22.08% | 56.64% | 52.03% | 15.91% | -7.87% | 47.61% | 31.30% |
IBTJ iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF | 0.04% | 6.89% | 1.82% | 4.49% | -12.45% | -3.57% | 4.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between GS and IBTJ is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020 | -0.09 |
The correlation between GS and IBTJ shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (all time) to 0.15 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
GS vs. IBTJ — Risk / Return Rank
GS
IBTJ
GS vs. IBTJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) and iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF (IBTJ). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| GS | IBTJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.25 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.80 | 2.02 | +1.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.61 | 5.49 | +7.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GS vs. IBTJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GS drawdown since its inception was -78.84%, which is greater than IBTJ's maximum drawdown of -20.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GS and IBTJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GS | IBTJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.84% | -20.19% | -58.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.42% | -1.62% | -17.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.90% | -4.43% | -26.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.84% | -17.21% | -15.63% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.75% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.73% | -6.17% | +3.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.65% | -9.71% | -12.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.84% | 0.59% | +5.25% |
Volatility
GS vs. IBTJ - Volatility Comparison
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) has a higher volatility of 11.84% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF (IBTJ) at 0.69%. This indicates that GS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBTJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GS | IBTJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.84% | 0.69% | +11.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.47% | 1.58% | +21.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.55% | 2.36% | +26.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.10% | 5.73% | +22.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.87% | 5.98% | +23.89% |
Dividends
GS vs. IBTJ - Dividend Comparison
GS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, less than IBTJ's 3.80% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GS The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. | 1.60% | 1.59% | 2.01% | 2.72% | 2.62% | 1.70% | 1.90% | 1.80% | 1.89% | 1.14% | 1.09% | 1.41% |
IBTJ iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF | 3.80% | 3.78% | 3.95% | 3.48% | 1.86% | 0.74% | 0.61% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GS and IBTJ have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GS has higher volatility (11.84%) compared to IBTJ (0.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GS dropped -78.84% vs IBTJ's -20.19%.
GS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.39), 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 GS and IBTJ
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