GVUS vs. FUNL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GVUS (Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF) and FUNL (CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. GVUS is passively managed, while FUNL is actively managed. Over the past year, GVUS returned 28.22% vs 18.97% for FUNL. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GVUS charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FUNL.

Performance

GVUS vs. FUNL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GVUS achieves a 14.24% return, which is significantly higher than FUNL's 5.66% return.

GVUS

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 4.34%
• YTD: 14.24%
• 6M: 14.89%
• 1Y: 28.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FUNL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.66%
• 6M: 7.22%
• 1Y: 18.97%
• 3Y*: 16.53%
• 5Y*: 9.42%
• 10Y*: —

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

GVUS vs. FUNL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GVUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF	14.24%	15.90%	14.08%	5.51%
FUNL CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL	5.66%	14.62%	15.55%	6.41%

Correlation

The correlation between GVUS and FUNL is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2023	0.89

The correlation between GVUS and FUNL shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (1 year) to 0.89 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GVUS vs. FUNL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GVUS	FUNL
Financial Services	19.2%	19.3%
Technology	15.0%	14.6%
Industrials	13.1%	11.5%
Healthcare	10.8%	15.3%
Communication Services	8.5%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.3%	6.5%
Consumer Defensive	7.1%	7.0%
Energy	6.9%	7.6%
Utilities	4.3%	5.0%
Real Estate	4.0%	4.5%
Basic Materials	3.8%	2.2%

Return for Risk

GVUS vs. FUNL — Risk / Return Rank

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

GVUS

GVUS Risk / Return Rank: 82
GVUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
GVUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
GVUS Omega Ratio Rank: 80
GVUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
GVUS Martin Ratio Rank: 85

FUNL

FUNL Risk / Return Rank: 80
FUNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FUNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FUNL Omega Ratio Rank: 79
FUNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FUNL Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

GVUS vs. FUNL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). 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.

	GVUS	FUNL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.19	+0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	3.26	+0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.47	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.24	5.01	-0.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.70	23.31	-5.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GVUS vs. FUNL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GVUS Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the FUNL Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GVUS and FUNL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GVUS	FUNL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.61	2.19	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.55	0.95	+0.60

Drawdowns

GVUS vs. FUNL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GVUS drawdown since its inception was -15.82%, smaller than the maximum FUNL drawdown of -19.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GVUS and FUNL.

Drawdown Indicators

	GVUS	FUNL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.82%	-19.35%	+3.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.68%	-3.83%	-2.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.37%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.12%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.01%	-3.54%	+1.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.60%	0.82%	+0.78%

Volatility

GVUS vs. FUNL - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS) has a higher volatility of 3.01% compared to CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) at 0.00%. This indicates that GVUS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FUNL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GVUS	FUNL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.01%	0.00%	+3.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.14%	5.24%	+2.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.86%	8.82%	+2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.28%	15.16%	-1.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.28%	15.29%	-2.01%

GVUS vs. FUNL - Expense Ratio Comparison

GVUS has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than FUNL's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

GVUS vs. FUNL - Dividend Comparison

GVUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, less than FUNL's 2.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FUNL CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL	2.25%	2.10%	1.78%	1.69%	1.84%	1.55%	0.45%
GVUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF	1.58%	1.77%	2.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GVUS and FUNL in my portfolio?

GVUS and FUNL have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GVUS or FUNL?

GVUS has higher volatility (3.01%) compared to FUNL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GVUS dropped -15.82% vs FUNL's -19.35%.

Which ETF is better, GVUS or FUNL?

On 1-year performance, GVUS leads with 28.22% vs 18.97% for FUNL. On fees, GVUS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, FUNL has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GVUS or FUNL?

Over the 1-year period, GVUS has performed better with a 28.22% return vs 18.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GVUS or FUNL?

GVUS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FUNL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GVUS or FUNL?

FUNL has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.58% for GVUS.

What is the main difference between GVUS and FUNL?

They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and CornerCap. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GVUS and 0.50% for FUNL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GVUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.19), 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.