GSLC vs. RPG
GSLC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF) and RPG (Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - GSLC tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index while RPG tracks the S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GSLC returned 14.65%/yr vs 15.14%/yr for RPG. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GSLC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RPG.
Performance
GSLC vs. RPG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GSLC achieves a 5.86% return, which is significantly lower than RPG's 30.31% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GSLC having a 14.65% annualized return and RPG not far ahead at 15.14%.
GSLC
- 1D
- -1.22%
- 1M
- -1.29%
- YTD
- 5.86%
- 6M
- 4.87%
- 1Y
- 19.37%
- 3Y*
- 19.26%
- 5Y*
- 11.78%
- 10Y*
- 14.65%
RPG
- 1D
- -4.60%
- 1M
- 5.48%
- YTD
- 30.31%
- 6M
- 27.62%
- 1Y
- 38.51%
- 3Y*
- 27.72%
- 5Y*
- 11.59%
- 10Y*
- 15.14%
GSLC vs. RPG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 5.86% | 16.17% | 24.21% | 25.09% | -18.71% | 27.17% | 19.02% | 30.74% | -4.07% | 22.49% |
RPG Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF | 30.31% | 13.41% | 28.23% | 8.04% | -27.55% | 29.40% | 29.34% | 28.34% | -4.53% | 26.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSLC and RPG is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2015 | 0.91 |
The correlation between GSLC and RPG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
GSLC vs. RPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GSLC
RPG
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
GSLC
RPG
Financial Services
GSLC
RPG
Consumer Cyclical
GSLC
RPG
Communication Services
GSLC
RPG
Healthcare
GSLC
RPG
Industrials
GSLC
RPG
Consumer Defensive
GSLC
RPG
Energy
GSLC
RPG
Utilities
GSLC
RPG
Basic Materials
GSLC
RPG
Real Estate
GSLC
RPG
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 vs. RPG — Risk / Return Rank
GSLC
RPG
GSLC vs. RPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) and Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG). 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 | RPG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.31 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.05 | 3.49 | -1.44 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.86 | 13.16 | -4.30 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GSLC vs. RPG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSLC drawdown since its inception was -33.69%, smaller than the maximum RPG drawdown of -53.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSLC and RPG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GSLC | RPG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.69% | -53.27% | +19.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.49% | -11.08% | +1.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.66% | -24.75% | +6.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.90% | -35.59% | +10.69% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.69% | -36.58% | +2.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.08% | -4.60% | +1.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.38% | -8.83% | +4.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | 2.93% | -0.74% |
Volatility
GSLC vs. RPG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) is 4.60%, while Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) has a volatility of 11.10%. This indicates that GSLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RPG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GSLC | RPG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.60% | 11.10% | -6.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.67% | 19.02% | -9.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.28% | 22.09% | -9.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.71% | 23.86% | -7.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.70% | 22.90% | -5.20% |
GSLC vs. RPG - Expense Ratio Comparison
GSLC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than RPG's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
GSLC vs. RPG - Dividend Comparison
GSLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, more than RPG's 0.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 0.95% | 1.00% | 1.11% | 1.38% | 1.61% | 1.06% | 1.35% | 1.54% | 1.89% | 1.69% | 1.69% | 0.36% |
RPG Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF | 0.15% | 0.24% | 0.25% | 1.44% | 0.74% | 0.00% | 0.46% | 0.83% | 0.47% | 0.56% | 0.43% | 0.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GSLC and RPG have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RPG has higher volatility (11.10%) compared to GSLC (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSLC dropped -33.69% vs RPG's -53.27%.
On 10-year performance, RPG leads with 15.14% vs 14.65% for GSLC. On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GSLC has been the lower-risk option at 4.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, RPG has performed better with a 15.14% return vs 14.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSLC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RPG.
GSLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.15% for RPG.
GSLC tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index, while RPG tracks S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for GSLC and 0.35% for RPG.
RPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.59), 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 GSLC and RPG
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