GSIE vs. UMMA
GSIE (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF) and UMMA (Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - GSIE tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity Index while UMMA tracks the Dow Jones Islamic Market International Titans 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GSIE returned 16.74%/yr vs 22.73%/yr for UMMA. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GSIE charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for UMMA.
Performance
GSIE vs. UMMA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GSIE achieves a 6.51% return, which is significantly lower than UMMA's 32.49% return.
GSIE
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 2.22%
- YTD
- 6.51%
- 6M
- 9.50%
- 1Y
- 19.35%
- 3Y*
- 16.74%
- 5Y*
- 8.04%
- 10Y*
- 9.08%
UMMA
- 1D
- -0.77%
- 1M
- 14.49%
- YTD
- 32.49%
- 6M
- 35.58%
- 1Y
- 53.55%
- 3Y*
- 22.73%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSIE vs. UMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSIE Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF | 6.51% | 32.53% | 5.23% | 16.99% | -15.45% |
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF | 32.49% | 26.65% | 4.67% | 18.84% | -21.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSIE and UMMA is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 10, 2022 | 0.84 |
The correlation between GSIE and UMMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
GSIE vs. UMMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GSIE
UMMA
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Communication Services
Utilities
-
Real Estate
Financial Services
GSIE
UMMA
-
Industrials
GSIE
UMMA
Technology
GSIE
UMMA
Healthcare
GSIE
UMMA
Consumer Cyclical
GSIE
UMMA
Consumer Defensive
GSIE
UMMA
Basic Materials
GSIE
UMMA
Energy
GSIE
UMMA
Communication Services
GSIE
UMMA
Utilities
GSIE
UMMA
-
Real Estate
GSIE
UMMA
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
GSIE vs. UMMA — Risk / Return Rank
GSIE
UMMA
GSIE vs. UMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). 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.
| GSIE | UMMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.46 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.81 | 3.60 | -1.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.87 | 14.07 | -7.20 |
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
| GSIE | UMMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.38 | 2.68 | -1.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.58 | -0.06 |
Drawdowns
GSIE vs. UMMA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSIE drawdown since its inception was -34.63%, roughly equal to the maximum UMMA drawdown of -34.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSIE and UMMA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GSIE | UMMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.63% | -34.17% | -0.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.76% | -14.93% | +4.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.07% | -18.73% | +5.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.97% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.63% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.19% | -0.77% | -1.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.06% | -9.82% | +3.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.82% | 3.82% | -1.00% |
Volatility
GSIE vs. UMMA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) is 4.38%, while Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) has a volatility of 7.64%. This indicates that GSIE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UMMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GSIE | UMMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.38% | 7.64% | -3.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.60% | 17.26% | -5.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.15% | 20.10% | -5.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.04% | 20.55% | -4.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.75% | 20.55% | -3.80% |
GSIE vs. UMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison
GSIE has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than UMMA's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
GSIE vs. UMMA - Dividend Comparison
GSIE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, more than UMMA's 0.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSIE Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF | 2.52% | 2.65% | 3.11% | 2.87% | 3.01% | 2.40% | 1.60% | 2.80% | 2.68% | 2.31% | 2.15% | 0.13% |
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF | 0.93% | 1.02% | 0.91% | 1.09% | 1.77% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GSIE and UMMA have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UMMA has higher volatility (7.64%) compared to GSIE (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSIE dropped -34.63% vs UMMA's -34.17%.
On 3-year performance, UMMA leads with 22.73% vs 16.74% for GSIE. On fees, GSIE is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, GSIE has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, UMMA has performed better with a 22.73% return vs 16.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSIE is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.
GSIE has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 0.93% for UMMA.
GSIE tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity Index, while UMMA tracks Dow Jones Islamic Market International Titans 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Wahed. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GSIE and 0.65% for UMMA.
UMMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 1.38), 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 GSIE and UMMA
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