GSIE vs. FNDF
Compare and contrast key facts about Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) and Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF).
GSIE and FNDF are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GSIE is a passively managed fund by Goldman Sachs that tracks the performance of the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity Index. It was launched on Nov 6, 2015. FNDF is a passively managed fund by Charles Schwab that tracks the performance of the Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index. It was launched on Aug 15, 2013. Both GSIE and FNDF are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: GSIE or FNDF.
Key characteristics
| GSIE | FNDF | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 6.13% | 3.42% |
| 1Y Return | 13.24% | 10.04% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 1.05% | 4.25% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 5.46% | 6.91% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.29 | 0.99 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.87 | 1.41 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.22 | 1.18 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.57 | 1.54 |
| Martin Ratio | 7.07 | 5.24 |
| Ulcer Index | 2.28% | 2.45% |
| Daily Std Dev | 12.46% | 12.91% |
| Max Drawdown | -34.63% | -40.14% |
| Current Drawdown | -7.13% | -8.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSIE and FNDF is 0.95, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
GSIE vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, GSIE achieves a 6.13% return, which is significantly higher than FNDF's 3.42% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
GSIE vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GSIE and FNDF have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
GSIE vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) and Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF). 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.
Dividends
GSIE vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison
GSIE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%, less than FNDF's 3.15% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSIE Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF | 2.84% | 2.87% | 3.01% | 2.40% | 1.24% | 2.80% | 2.68% | 2.31% | 2.15% | 0.13% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF | 3.15% | 3.41% | 3.10% | 3.54% | 2.17% | 3.20% | 3.47% | 2.32% | 2.42% | 2.08% | 1.83% | 0.48% |
Drawdowns
GSIE vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSIE drawdown since its inception was -34.63%, smaller than the maximum FNDF drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSIE and FNDF. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
GSIE vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) is 3.74%, while Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF) has a volatility of 4.06%. This indicates that GSIE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.