GSIB vs. PTIR

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) and PTIR (GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes, while PTIR is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Palantir Technologies Inc. (200%). GSIB is actively managed, while PTIR is passively managed. Over the past year, GSIB returned 46.76% vs -58.75% for PTIR. Their 0.31 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GSIB charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.04%/yr for PTIR.

Performance

GSIB vs. PTIR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) and GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF (PTIR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSIB achieves a 22.66% return, which is significantly higher than PTIR's -62.18% return.

GSIB

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 7.17%
• 6M: 18.14%
• YTD: 22.66%
• 1Y: 46.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 45.58%

PTIR

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: -6.82%
• 6M: -43.20%
• YTD: -62.18%
• 1Y: -58.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 164.95%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	$2.37M	$1.31M	$753.15K
PTIR GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF	$34.43M	$50.90M	$65.92M

GSIB vs. PTIR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	22.66%	61.67%	11.06%
PTIR GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF	-62.18%	221.36%	425.36%

Correlation

The correlation between GSIB and PTIR is 0.27, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 4, 2024	0.31

GSIB vs. PTIR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GSIB	PTIR
Financial Services	99.3%	-
Technology	0.1%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GSIB vs. PTIR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 90
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 91
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 85

PTIR

PTIR Risk / Return Rank: 4
PTIR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
PTIR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
PTIR Omega Ratio Rank: 6
PTIR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
PTIR Martin Ratio Rank: 3

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GSIB vs. PTIR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) and GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF (PTIR). 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	PTIR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	-0.56	+3.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.65	-0.43	+4.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	0.95	+0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.38	-0.74	+4.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.87	-1.21	+13.08

GSIB vs. PTIR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSIB Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is higher than the PTIR Sharpe Ratio of -0.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSIB and PTIR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GSIB vs. PTIR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSIB drawdown since its inception was -17.71%, smaller than the maximum PTIR drawdown of -79.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSIB and PTIR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSIB	PTIR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.71%	-79.40%	+61.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.90%	-79.40%	+65.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-73.93%	+73.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.99%	-31.05%	+29.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.95%	48.56%	-44.61%

Volatility

GSIB vs. PTIR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) is 5.74%, while GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF (PTIR) has a volatility of 27.36%. This indicates that GSIB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PTIR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GSIB	PTIR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.74%	27.36%	-21.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.93%	81.50%	-66.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.90%	104.45%	-86.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.46%	127.66%	-109.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.46%	127.66%	-109.20%

GSIB vs. PTIR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSIB has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than PTIR's 1.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSIB vs. PTIR - Dividend Comparison

GSIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, less than PTIR's 15.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.55%	1.91%	1.67%
PTIR GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF	15.36%	5.81%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GSIB and PTIR in my portfolio?

GSIB and PTIR have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GSIB or PTIR?

PTIR has higher volatility (27.36%) compared to GSIB (5.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSIB dropped -17.71% vs PTIR's -79.40%.

Which ETF is better, GSIB or PTIR?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 46.76% vs -58.75% for PTIR. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 5.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GSIB or PTIR?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 46.76% return vs -58.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GSIB or PTIR?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for PTIR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GSIB or PTIR?

PTIR has the higher dividend yield at 15.36%, compared with 1.55% for GSIB.

What is the main difference between GSIB and PTIR?

GSIB is categorized as Financials Equities, while PTIR is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Themes and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GSIB and 1.04% for PTIR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs -0.56), 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.