PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GSIE vs. UMMA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GSIE vs. UMMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

GSIE vs. UMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
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

27.1%

-

Industrials

18.0%
13.5%

Technology

9.5%
42.9%

Healthcare

9.1%
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.1%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

7.2%
5.6%

Basic Materials

5.8%
9.3%

Energy

4.4%
2.9%

Communication Services

3.8%
0.8%

Utilities

3.2%

-

Real Estate

1.2%
0.5%

Financial Services

GSIE
27.1%
UMMA

-

Industrials

GSIE
18.0%
UMMA
13.5%

Technology

GSIE
9.5%
UMMA
42.9%

Healthcare

GSIE
9.1%
UMMA
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

GSIE
9.1%
UMMA
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

GSIE
7.2%
UMMA
5.6%

Basic Materials

GSIE
5.8%
UMMA
9.3%

Energy

GSIE
4.4%
UMMA
2.9%

Communication Services

GSIE
3.8%
UMMA
0.8%

Utilities

GSIE
3.2%
UMMA

-

Real Estate

GSIE
1.2%
UMMA
0.5%

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GSIE
GSIE Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
GSIE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSIE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSIE Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
GSIE Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSIE Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

UMMA
UMMA Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
UMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
UMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
UMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
UMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

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.


GSIEUMMADifference
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

GSIE vs. UMMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSIE Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is lower than the UMMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSIE and UMMA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GSIEUMMADifference

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


GSIEUMMADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.19%

-0.77%

-1.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.06%

-9.82%

+3.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


GSIEUMMADifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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