PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GSLC.L vs. CBND.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.) (GSLC.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSLC.L achieves a 9.36% return, which is significantly higher than CBND.L's 4.87% return.


GSLC.L

1D
-0.74%
1M
-0.65%
6M
9.16%
YTD
9.36%
1Y
18.35%
3Y*
18.80%
5Y*
11.81%
10Y*

CBND.L

1D
0.05%
1M
0.02%
6M
4.64%
YTD
4.87%
1Y
7.44%
3Y*
5.57%
5Y*
2.85%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
GSLC.L
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.)
9.36%16.46%23.06%25.17%-19.07%27.52%18.12%6.98%
CBND.L
Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
4.87%5.04%4.67%1.28%-5.17%7.61%8.70%3.08%

Correlation

The correlation between GSLC.L and CBND.L is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.30

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.13

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2019

0.22

The correlation between GSLC.L and CBND.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (3 years) to 0.30 (1 year), 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

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSLC.L
GSLC.L Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
GSLC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSLC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSLC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
GSLC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSLC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

CBND.L
CBND.L Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
CBND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CBND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.) (GSLC.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L). 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.


GSLC.LCBND.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.47

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.81

7.45

-5.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.31

18.48

-11.17

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSLC.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is lower than the CBND.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSLC.L and CBND.L, 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

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSLC.L drawdown since its inception was -33.84%, which is greater than CBND.L's maximum drawdown of -11.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSLC.L and CBND.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GSLC.LCBND.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.84%

-11.48%

-22.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.07%

-0.99%

-9.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.98%

-3.66%

-15.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.50%

-11.48%

-13.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-0.21%

-1.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.57%

-2.80%

-2.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.51%

0.40%

+2.11%

Volatility

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.) (GSLC.L) has a higher volatility of 3.70% compared to Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) at 0.89%. This indicates that GSLC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBND.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GSLC.LCBND.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.70%

0.89%

+2.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.76%

2.58%

+8.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.75%

3.11%

+10.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.22%

5.02%

+11.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.88%

4.94%

+12.94%

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSLC.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than CBND.L's 0.24% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

GSLC.L vs. CBND.L - Dividend Comparison

GSLC.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBND.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CBND.L
Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
2.04%2.20%2.45%2.54%2.72%2.52%1.87%
GSLC.L
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GSLC.L and CBND.L have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GSLC.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GSLC.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for CBND.L.

GSLC.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while CBND.L is Government Bonds. GSLC.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while CBND.L tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for GSLC.L and 0.24% for CBND.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GSLC.L and CBND.L

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