PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GSWO vs. GBIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GSWO vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF (GSWO) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSWO achieves a 11.00% return, which is significantly higher than GBIL's 1.42% return.


GSWO

1D
-0.71%
1M
4.81%
YTD
11.00%
6M
11.56%
1Y
20.17%
3Y*
18.70%
5Y*
10Y*

GBIL

1D
0.02%
1M
0.28%
YTD
1.42%
6M
1.73%
1Y
3.91%
3Y*
4.64%
5Y*
3.32%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GSWO vs. GBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
GSWO
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF
11.00%18.97%15.29%16.28%-6.15%
GBIL
Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF
1.42%4.12%5.24%4.91%1.14%

Correlation

The correlation between GSWO and GBIL is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.03

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

0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022

0.04

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

GSWO vs. GBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSWO
GSWO Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
GSWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSWO Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
GSWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSWO Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

GBIL
GBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
GBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
GBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
GBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
GBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

GSWO vs. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF (GSWO) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). 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.


GSWOGBILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-15.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-100.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

39.42

-38.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.27

196.43

-194.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.87

1,608.66

-1,597.80

GSWO vs. GBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSWO Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is lower than the GBIL Sharpe Ratio of 16.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSWO and GBIL, 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


GSWOGBILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.88

16.89

-15.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

5.78

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.99

4.87

-3.88

Drawdowns

GSWO vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSWO drawdown since its inception was -17.77%, which is greater than GBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSWO and GBIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GSWOGBILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.77%

-0.76%

-17.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.93%

-0.02%

-8.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.97%

-0.76%

-9.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-0.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.71%

0.00%

-0.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.25%

-0.04%

-3.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.86%

0.00%

+1.86%

Volatility

GSWO vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF (GSWO) has a higher volatility of 3.22% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) at 0.04%. This indicates that GSWO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GSWOGBILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.22%

0.04%

+3.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.02%

0.14%

+8.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.75%

0.23%

+10.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.96%

0.58%

+12.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.96%

0.47%

+12.49%

GSWO vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSWO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% 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

GSWO vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison

GSWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than GBIL's 3.74% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
GBIL
Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF
3.74%4.02%4.93%4.77%1.37%0.00%0.81%2.20%1.70%0.74%0.11%
GSWO
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF
1.61%1.74%1.75%2.06%1.73%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GSWO and GBIL have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GSWO has higher volatility (3.22%) compared to GBIL (0.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSWO dropped -17.77% vs GBIL's -0.76%.

On 3-year performance, GSWO leads with 18.70% vs 4.64% for GBIL. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, GSWO has performed better with a 18.70% return vs 4.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for GSWO.

GBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.74%, compared with 1.61% for GSWO.

GSWO is categorized as Global Equities, while GBIL is Government Bonds. GSWO tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Low Vol Plus Equity Index - Benchmark TR Net, while GBIL tracks FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GSWO and 0.12% for GBIL.

GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.89 vs 1.88), 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 GSWO and GBIL

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