PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GSJY vs. IBIC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GSJY vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF (GSJY) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSJY achieves a 12.58% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.43% return.


GSJY

1D
-3.94%
1M
1.06%
YTD
12.58%
6M
11.90%
1Y
31.84%
3Y*
18.03%
5Y*
8.87%
10Y*
9.36%

IBIC

1D
0.04%
1M
0.12%
YTD
2.43%
6M
2.57%
1Y
4.42%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GSJY vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
GSJY
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF
12.58%26.22%8.89%1.32%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
2.43%4.96%5.25%2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between GSJY and IBIC is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023

0.06

The correlation between GSJY and IBIC shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to 0.06 (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

GSJY vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSJY
GSJY Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
GSJY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSJY Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSJY Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
GSJY Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSJY Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

GSJY vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF (GSJY) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). 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.


GSJYIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-6.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

2.22

-0.93

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.27

16.56

-14.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.44

58.67

-51.23

GSJY vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSJY Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSJY and IBIC, 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...

Drawdowns

GSJY vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSJY drawdown since its inception was -32.53%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSJY and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GSJYIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.53%

-0.90%

-31.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.08%

-0.27%

-13.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.94%

-0.08%

-3.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.56%

-0.10%

-7.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.29%

0.08%

+4.21%

Volatility

GSJY vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF (GSJY) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.17%. This indicates that GSJY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GSJYIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.37%

0.17%

+7.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.53%

0.67%

+15.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.44%

0.89%

+19.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.29%

1.56%

+16.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.10%

1.56%

+15.54%

GSJY vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSJY has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

GSJY vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

GSJY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.76%, less than IBIC's 3.58% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
GSJY
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF
1.76%1.99%1.64%2.11%2.13%1.73%1.22%2.79%3.28%1.70%2.09%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.58%4.43%4.65%0.83%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GSJY and IBIC have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GSJY has higher volatility (7.37%) compared to IBIC (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSJY dropped -32.53% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, GSJY leads with 31.84% vs 4.42% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GSJY has performed better with a 31.84% return vs 4.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for GSJY.

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 1.76% for GSJY.

GSJY is categorized as Japan Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. GSJY tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GSJY and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs 1.57), 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 GSJY and IBIC

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