IAU vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

IAU (iShares Gold Trust) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. IAU is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, IAU returned 22.32% vs 47.83% for GSIB. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IAU charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

IAU vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Gold Trust (IAU) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IAU achieves a -2.44% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 13.98% return.

IAU

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -9.54%
• YTD: -2.44%
• 6M: -2.22%
• 1Y: 22.32%
• 3Y*: 29.07%
• 5Y*: 17.23%
• 10Y*: 12.31%

GSIB

• 1D: 1.92%
• 1M: 6.99%
• YTD: 13.98%
• 6M: 16.88%
• 1Y: 47.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IAU vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IAU iShares Gold Trust	-2.44%	63.95%	26.85%	1.25%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	13.98%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between IAU and GSIB is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.19

IAU vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IAU	GSIB
Real Estate	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

IAU vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

IAU

IAU Risk / Return Rank: 26
IAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
IAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
IAU Omega Ratio Rank: 30
IAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
IAU Martin Ratio Rank: 24

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 81
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 83
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

IAU vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Trust (IAU) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB). 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.

	IAU	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	2.59	-1.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.25	3.58	-2.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.43	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.99	3.28	-2.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.83	11.54	-8.71

IAU vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IAU and GSIB, 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

IAU vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IAU drawdown since its inception was -45.14%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAU and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	IAU	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.14%	-17.71%	-27.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.40%	-13.90%	-10.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.40%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.40%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.40%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.03%	0.00%	-22.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.97%	-2.05%	-13.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.47%	3.94%	+4.53%

Volatility

IAU vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Trust (IAU) has a higher volatility of 7.70% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 5.59%. This indicates that IAU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IAU	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.70%	5.59%	+2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.94%	14.41%	+9.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.17%	17.63%	+9.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.16%	18.51%	-0.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.02%	18.51%	-2.49%

IAU vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

IAU has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IAU vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

IAU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GSIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.67%	1.91%	1.67%
IAU iShares Gold Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IAU and GSIB in my portfolio?

IAU and GSIB have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IAU or GSIB?

IAU has higher volatility (7.70%) compared to GSIB (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IAU dropped -45.14% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, IAU or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 47.83% vs 22.32% for IAU. On fees, IAU is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 5.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IAU or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 47.83% return vs 22.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IAU or GSIB?

IAU is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for GSIB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IAU or GSIB?

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 0.00% for IAU.

What is the main difference between IAU and GSIB?

IAU is categorized as Gold, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for IAU and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 0.89), 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.