PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IPAY vs. GINN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IPAY vs. GINN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAY achieves a -2.46% return, which is significantly lower than GINN's 9.33% return.


IPAY

1D
1.56%
1M
4.88%
6M
3.61%
YTD
-2.46%
1Y
-9.51%
3Y*
6.01%
5Y*
-5.73%
10Y*
7.66%
ALL TIME*
6.67%

GINN

1D
1.55%
1M
1.06%
6M
7.30%
YTD
9.33%
1Y
21.13%
3Y*
18.35%
5Y*
6.21%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.96%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$141.87K$128.01K$214.74K
$3.69M$3.96M$2.49M

IPAY vs. GINN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
IPAY
ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF
-2.46%-9.55%25.88%18.21%-32.38%-12.72%18.81%
GINN
Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF
9.33%20.25%18.71%29.94%-32.40%10.39%8.08%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAY and GINN is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.71

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.79

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2020

0.84

The correlation between IPAY and GINN shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.85 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IPAY vs. GINN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IPAY
GINN

Technology

52.0%
33.0%

Financial Services

43.1%
12.5%

Industrials

4.9%
5.0%

Basic Materials

-

0.1%

Communication Services

-

9.6%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.7%

Energy

-

1.3%

Healthcare

-

22.0%

Real Estate

-

0.6%

Utilities

-

1.7%

Technology

IPAY
52.0%
GINN
33.0%

Financial Services

IPAY
43.1%
GINN
12.5%

Industrials

IPAY
4.9%
GINN
5.0%

Basic Materials

IPAY

-

GINN
0.1%

Communication Services

IPAY

-

GINN
9.6%

Consumer Cyclical

IPAY

-

GINN
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

IPAY

-

GINN
1.7%

Energy

IPAY

-

GINN
1.3%

Healthcare

IPAY

-

GINN
22.0%

Real Estate

IPAY

-

GINN
0.6%

Utilities

IPAY

-

GINN
1.7%

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

IPAY vs. GINN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IPAY
IPAY Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
IPAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IPAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
IPAY Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
IPAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
IPAY Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

GINN
GINN Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
GINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
GINN Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
GINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
GINN Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IPAY vs. GINN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). 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.


IPAYGINNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.95

1.22

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.31

1.61

-1.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.52

5.47

-6.00

IPAY vs. GINN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAY Sharpe Ratio is -0.39, which is lower than the GINN Sharpe Ratio of 1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAY and GINN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IPAY vs. GINN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAY drawdown since its inception was -51.75%, which is greater than GINN's maximum drawdown of -41.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAY and GINN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IPAYGINNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.75%

-41.25%

-10.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-30.88%

-13.18%

-17.70%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-32.74%

-22.25%

-10.49%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-51.49%

-41.25%

-10.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-29.38%

-1.00%

-28.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.93%

-13.08%

-3.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

18.21%

3.87%

+14.34%

Volatility

IPAY vs. GINN - Volatility Comparison

ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) has a higher volatility of 7.11% compared to Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN) at 4.15%. This indicates that IPAY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GINN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IPAYGINNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.11%

4.15%

+2.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.94%

13.00%

+6.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.73%

16.63%

+8.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.33%

21.45%

+4.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.43%

20.95%

+4.48%

IPAY vs. GINN - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAY has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GINN's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

IPAY vs. GINN - Dividend Comparison

IPAY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%, less than GINN's 1.15% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
GINN
Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF
1.15%1.26%1.26%1.01%0.69%0.67%0.07%
IPAY
ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF
0.81%0.79%0.77%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IPAY and GINN have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IPAY has higher volatility (7.11%) compared to GINN (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAY dropped -51.75% vs GINN's -41.25%.

On 5-year performance, GINN leads with 6.21% vs -5.73% for IPAY. On fees, GINN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GINN has been the lower-risk option at 4.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GINN has performed better with a 6.21% return vs -5.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GINN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for IPAY.

GINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.81% for IPAY.

IPAY tracks Prime Mobile Payments Index, while GINN tracks Solactive Innovative Global Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: ETFMG and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for IPAY and 0.50% for GINN.

GINN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs -0.39), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IPAY and GINN

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