IPAY vs. GINN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IPAY (ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF) and GINN (Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF) are both Technology Equities funds - IPAY tracks the Prime Mobile Payments Index while GINN tracks the Solactive Innovative Global Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IPAY returned -9.21%/yr vs 5.45%/yr for GINN. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IPAY charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for GINN.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAY achieves a -16.12% return, which is significantly lower than GINN's 5.00% return.

IPAY

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: -3.52%
• YTD: -16.12%
• 6M: -17.27%
• 1Y: -23.67%
• 3Y*: 2.21%
• 5Y*: -9.21%
• 10Y*: 6.77%

GINN

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: 5.00%
• 6M: 3.65%
• 1Y: 20.17%
• 3Y*: 18.28%
• 5Y*: 5.45%
• 10Y*: —

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

IPAY vs. GINN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IPAY ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF	-16.12%	-9.55%	25.88%	18.21%	-32.38%	-12.72%	18.81%
GINN Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF	5.00%	20.25%	18.71%	29.94%	-32.40%	10.39%	8.08%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAY and GINN is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2020	0.85

The correlation between IPAY and GINN shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (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	53.9%	32.6%
Financial Services	41.8%	12.4%
Industrials	4.3%	4.7%
Basic Materials	-	0.1%
Communication Services	-	10.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.7%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.8%
Energy	-	1.7%
Healthcare	-	20.6%
Real Estate	-	0.6%
Utilities	-	1.7%

Return for Risk

IPAY vs. GINN — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAY

IPAY Risk / Return Rank: 2
IPAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
IPAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
IPAY Omega Ratio Rank: 2
IPAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
IPAY Martin Ratio Rank: 2

GINN

GINN Risk / Return Rank: 35
GINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
GINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
GINN Omega Ratio Rank: 34
GINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
GINN Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

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.

	IPAY	GINN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.00	1.22	-2.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.28	1.75	-3.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	1.22	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.76	1.54	-2.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.36	5.39	-6.75

IPAY vs. GINN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAY Sharpe Ratio is -1.00, which is lower than the GINN Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPAY	GINN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.75%	-41.25%	-10.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.31%	-13.18%	-18.13%
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	-39.27%	-4.93%	-34.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.77%	-13.28%	-3.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.46%	3.75%	+13.71%

Volatility

IPAY vs. GINN - Volatility Comparison

ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF (IPAY) has a higher volatility of 7.88% compared to Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN) at 5.81%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	IPAY	GINN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.88%	5.81%	+2.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.78%	12.92%	+5.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.92%	16.57%	+7.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.15%	21.44%	+4.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.39%	21.07%	+4.32%

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 0.94%, less than GINN's 1.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GINN Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF	1.20%	1.26%	1.26%	1.01%	0.69%	0.67%	0.07%
IPAY ETFMG Prime Mobile Payments ETF	0.94%	0.79%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IPAY and GINN in my portfolio?

IPAY and GINN have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPAY or GINN?

IPAY has higher volatility (7.88%) compared to GINN (5.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAY dropped -51.75% vs GINN's -41.25%.

Which ETF is better, IPAY or GINN?

On 5-year performance, GINN leads with 5.45% vs -9.21% for IPAY. On fees, GINN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GINN has been the lower-risk option at 5.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPAY or GINN?

Over the 5-year period, GINN has performed better with a 5.45% return vs -9.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPAY or GINN?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IPAY or GINN?

GINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.94% for IPAY.

What is the main difference between IPAY and GINN?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GINN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.22 vs -1.00), 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.