GTIP vs. BWX
GTIP (Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF) and BWX (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays International Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GTIP is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs Treasury Inflation Protected USD Bond Index, while BWX is a International Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Treasury x US Capped (Inception 8/31/2007). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GTIP returned 1.09%/yr vs -4.48%/yr for BWX. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GTIP charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BWX.
Performance
GTIP vs. BWX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GTIP achieves a 1.70% return, which is significantly higher than BWX's -1.91% return.
GTIP
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 0.04%
- YTD
- 1.70%
- 6M
- 1.11%
- 1Y
- 5.10%
- 3Y*
- 4.01%
- 5Y*
- 1.09%
- 10Y*
- —
BWX
- 1D
- -0.59%
- 1M
- -0.88%
- YTD
- -1.91%
- 6M
- -1.77%
- 1Y
- -2.28%
- 3Y*
- 1.18%
- 5Y*
- -4.48%
- 10Y*
- -1.28%
GTIP vs. BWX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GTIP Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF | 1.70% | 6.63% | 2.04% | 3.88% | -12.14% | 5.86% | 10.83% | 8.33% | 0.24% |
BWX SPDR Bloomberg Barclays International Treasury Bond ETF | -1.91% | 7.67% | -5.93% | 5.10% | -19.72% | -8.67% | 9.50% | 5.58% | 2.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between GTIP and BWX is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2018 | 0.53 |
The correlation between GTIP and BWX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GTIP vs. BWX — Risk / Return Rank
GTIP
BWX
GTIP vs. BWX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF (GTIP) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays International Treasury Bond ETF (BWX). 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.
| GTIP | BWX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 0.96 | +0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.54 | -0.37 | +2.91 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.00 | -0.76 | +8.76 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GTIP | BWX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.53 | -0.30 | +1.83 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 | -0.47 | +0.65 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.15 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.56 | 0.05 | +0.50 |
Drawdowns
GTIP vs. BWX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GTIP drawdown since its inception was -14.31%, smaller than the maximum BWX drawdown of -34.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GTIP and BWX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GTIP | BWX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.31% | -34.05% | +19.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.02% | -6.16% | +4.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.47% | -10.22% | +5.75% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.31% | -31.25% | +16.94% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.05% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -23.98% | +23.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.24% | -10.05% | +5.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.64% | 3.00% | -2.36% |
Volatility
GTIP vs. BWX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF (GTIP) is 0.97%, while SPDR Bloomberg Barclays International Treasury Bond ETF (BWX) has a volatility of 2.41%. This indicates that GTIP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BWX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GTIP | BWX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.97% | 2.41% | -1.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.32% | 5.79% | -3.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.34% | 7.70% | -4.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.07% | 9.69% | -3.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.01% | 8.66% | -2.65% |
GTIP vs. BWX - Expense Ratio Comparison
GTIP has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than BWX's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
GTIP vs. BWX - Dividend Comparison
GTIP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.69%, more than BWX's 2.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWX SPDR Bloomberg Barclays International Treasury Bond ETF | 2.37% | 2.19% | 1.99% | 1.63% | 1.23% | 0.93% | 0.95% | 1.16% | 1.07% | 0.46% |
GTIP Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF | 4.69% | 4.58% | 3.52% | 2.77% | 6.47% | 3.82% | 1.04% | 2.34% | 0.66% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GTIP and BWX have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BWX has higher volatility (2.41%) compared to GTIP (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GTIP dropped -14.31% vs BWX's -34.05%.
On 5-year performance, GTIP leads with 1.09% vs -4.48% for BWX. On fees, GTIP is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GTIP has been the lower-risk option at 0.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GTIP has performed better with a 1.09% return vs -4.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GTIP is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BWX.
GTIP has the higher dividend yield at 4.69%, compared with 2.37% for BWX.
GTIP is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while BWX is International Government Bonds. GTIP tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Treasury Inflation Protected USD Bond Index, while BWX tracks Bloomberg Global Treasury x US Capped (Inception 8/31/2007). They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GTIP and 0.35% for BWX.
GTIP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs -0.30), 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 GTIP and BWX
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