GSWO vs. SFGV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GSWO (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF) and SFGV (Sequoia Global Value ETF) are both Global Equities funds. GSWO is passively managed, while SFGV is actively managed. Over the past year, GSWO returned 17.89% vs 24.39% for SFGV. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GSWO charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for SFGV.

Performance

GSWO vs. SFGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF (GSWO) and Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSWO achieves a 8.64% return, which is significantly lower than SFGV's 11.40% return.

GSWO

• 1D: -1.71%
• 1M: -0.93%
• YTD: 8.64%
• 6M: 8.14%
• 1Y: 17.89%
• 3Y*: 17.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SFGV

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 0.60%
• YTD: 11.40%
• 6M: 11.08%
• 1Y: 24.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GSWO vs. SFGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GSWO Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF	8.64%	18.97%	15.40%
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	11.40%	18.84%	11.04%

Correlation

The correlation between GSWO and SFGV is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 18, 2024	0.83

The correlation between GSWO and SFGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GSWO vs. SFGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSWO

GSWO Risk / Return Rank: 49
GSWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
GSWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
GSWO Omega Ratio Rank: 49
GSWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
GSWO Martin Ratio Rank: 57

SFGV

SFGV Risk / Return Rank: 69
SFGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
SFGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
SFGV Omega Ratio Rank: 69
SFGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
SFGV Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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. SFGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF (GSWO) and Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV). 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.

	GSWO	SFGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	2.08	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	3.00	-0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.37	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	2.93	-0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.35	10.93	-1.58

GSWO vs. SFGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSWO Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the SFGV Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSWO and SFGV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GSWO vs. SFGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSWO drawdown since its inception was -17.77%, which is greater than SFGV's maximum drawdown of -14.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSWO and SFGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSWO	SFGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.77%	-14.51%	-3.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.93%	-8.36%	-0.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.97%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.83%	-1.46%	-1.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.23%	-1.87%	-1.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	2.24%	-0.32%

Volatility

GSWO vs. SFGV - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF (GSWO) has a higher volatility of 4.94% compared to Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) at 3.31%. This indicates that GSWO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SFGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GSWO	SFGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.94%	3.31%	+1.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.08%	8.88%	+1.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.58%	11.79%	-0.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.07%	13.25%	-0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.07%	13.25%	-0.18%

GSWO vs. SFGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSWO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than SFGV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSWO vs. SFGV - Dividend Comparison

GSWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.65%, less than SFGV's 2.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GSWO Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta World Equity ETF	1.65%	1.74%	1.75%	2.06%	1.73%
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	2.25%	2.52%	2.23%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GSWO and SFGV in my portfolio?

GSWO and SFGV have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GSWO or SFGV?

GSWO has higher volatility (4.94%) compared to SFGV (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSWO dropped -17.77% vs SFGV's -14.51%.

Which ETF is better, GSWO or SFGV?

On 1-year performance, SFGV leads with 24.39% vs 17.89% for GSWO. On fees, GSWO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, SFGV has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GSWO or SFGV?

Over the 1-year period, SFGV has performed better with a 24.39% return vs 17.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GSWO or SFGV?

GSWO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for SFGV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GSWO or SFGV?

SFGV has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.65% for GSWO.

What is the main difference between GSWO and SFGV?

They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Sequoia. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GSWO and 0.33% for SFGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SFGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.56), 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.