PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GUG vs. GIBIX
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

GUG vs. GIBIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Guggenheim Active Allocation Fund (GUG) and Guggenheim Total Return Bond Fund (GIBIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

GUG vs. GIBIX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GUG
Guggenheim Active Allocation Fund
2.21%13.12%11.46%20.68%-26.55%-0.20%
GIBIX
Guggenheim Total Return Bond Fund
-0.52%8.22%3.18%7.45%-16.38%0.91%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GUG achieves a 2.21% return, which is significantly higher than GIBIX's -0.52% return.


GUG

1D
0.66%
1M
-3.75%
YTD
2.21%
6M
1.80%
1Y
10.00%
3Y*
13.27%
5Y*
10Y*

GIBIX

1D
0.21%
1M
-1.85%
YTD
-0.52%
6M
0.34%
1Y
4.30%
3Y*
4.73%
5Y*
0.59%
10Y*
2.96%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


GUG vs. GIBIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GUG has a 3.86% expense ratio, which is higher than GIBIX's 0.50% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

GUG vs. GIBIX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GUG
GUG Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
GUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
GUG Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
GUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
GUG Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

GIBIX
GIBIX Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
GIBIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GIBIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
GIBIX Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
GIBIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
GIBIX Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

GUG vs. GIBIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Guggenheim Active Allocation Fund (GUG) and Guggenheim Total Return Bond Fund (GIBIX). 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.


GUGGIBIXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.75

1.09

-0.34

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.11

1.57

-0.46

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.19

-0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.36

1.92

-0.56

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.87

5.96

-2.09

GUG vs. GIBIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GUG Sharpe Ratio is 0.75, which is lower than the GIBIX Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GUG and GIBIX, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GUGGIBIXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.75

1.09

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.17

0.92

-0.74

Correlation

The correlation between GUG and GIBIX is 0.25, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

GUG vs. GIBIX - Dividend Comparison

GUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.30%, more than GIBIX's 4.66% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GUG
Guggenheim Active Allocation Fund
9.30%9.30%9.58%9.72%9.71%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
GIBIX
Guggenheim Total Return Bond Fund
4.66%5.03%4.71%4.44%3.08%3.36%4.80%2.38%3.25%3.38%4.68%4.39%

Drawdowns

GUG vs. GIBIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GUG drawdown since its inception was -32.78%, which is greater than GIBIX's maximum drawdown of -21.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GUG and GIBIX.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


GUGGIBIXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.78%

-21.44%

-11.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.03%

-2.99%

-5.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-21.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.82%

-2.30%

-2.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.02%

-3.44%

-8.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.96%

0.96%

+2.00%

Volatility

GUG vs. GIBIX - Volatility Comparison

Guggenheim Active Allocation Fund (GUG) has a higher volatility of 3.40% compared to Guggenheim Total Return Bond Fund (GIBIX) at 1.58%. This indicates that GUG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GIBIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


GUGGIBIXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.40%

1.58%

+1.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.69%

2.54%

+6.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.43%

4.34%

+9.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.72%

5.81%

+11.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.72%

4.74%

+12.98%