GSIB vs. ATMP
GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) and ATMP (Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes, while ATMP is a MLPs fund tracking the CIBC Atlas Select MLP VWAP. GSIB is actively managed, while ATMP is passively managed. Over the past year, GSIB returned 49.09% vs 23.85% for ATMP. Their 0.26 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GSIB charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for ATMP.
Performance
GSIB vs. ATMP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GSIB achieves a 22.66% return, which is significantly lower than ATMP's 26.22% return.
GSIB
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- 6.55%
- 6M
- 18.14%
- YTD
- 22.66%
- 1Y
- 49.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 45.58%
ATMP
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- 5.19%
- 6M
- 17.51%
- YTD
- 26.22%
- 1Y
- 23.85%
- 3Y*
- 20.30%
- 5Y*
- 18.49%
- 10Y*
- 5.16%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.84%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $521.25K | $462.49K | $511.48K | |
| $2.37M | $1.31M | $753.15K |
GSIB vs. ATMP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF | 22.66% | 61.67% | 32.86% | 1.75% |
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN | 26.22% | 1.73% | 31.66% | 0.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSIB and ATMP is -0.02, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023 | 0.26 |
The correlation between GSIB and ATMP shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.26 (all time), 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
GSIB vs. ATMP — Risk / Return Rank
GSIB
ATMP
GSIB vs. ATMP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) and Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP). 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.
| GSIB | ATMP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.27 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.38 | 2.81 | +0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.87 | 6.57 | +5.30 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GSIB vs. ATMP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSIB drawdown since its inception was -17.71%, smaller than the maximum ATMP drawdown of -80.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSIB and ATMP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GSIB | ATMP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.71% | -80.86% | +63.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.90% | -8.30% | -5.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.48% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.98% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -75.66% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.11% | -1.27% | +1.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.99% | -30.81% | +28.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.95% | 3.54% | +0.41% |
Volatility
GSIB vs. ATMP - Volatility Comparison
Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a higher volatility of 5.74% compared to Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP) at 5.01%. This indicates that GSIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ATMP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GSIB | ATMP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.74% | 5.01% | +0.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.93% | 11.75% | +3.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.90% | 14.57% | +3.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.46% | 21.94% | -3.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.46% | 27.62% | -9.16% |
GSIB vs. ATMP - Expense Ratio Comparison
GSIB has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than ATMP's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
GSIB vs. ATMP - Dividend Comparison
GSIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, while ATMP has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF | 1.55% | 1.91% | 1.67% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GSIB and ATMP have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSIB has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to ATMP (5.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSIB dropped -17.71% vs ATMP's -80.86%.
On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 49.09% vs 23.85% for ATMP. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, ATMP has been the lower-risk option at 5.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 49.09% return vs 23.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ATMP.
GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.00% for ATMP.
GSIB is categorized as Financials Equities, while ATMP is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Themes and Barclays Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GSIB and 0.95% for ATMP.
GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.60), 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 GSIB and ATMP
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