KBWP vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

KBWP (Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. KBWP is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, KBWP returned -6.56% vs 44.95% for GSIB. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

KBWP vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF (KBWP) 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, KBWP achieves a -8.05% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 10.94% return.

KBWP

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -2.49%
• YTD: -8.05%
• 6M: -4.56%
• 1Y: -6.56%
• 3Y*: 14.80%
• 5Y*: 10.19%
• 10Y*: 11.32%

GSIB

• 1D: 1.36%
• 1M: 4.75%
• YTD: 10.94%
• 6M: 17.71%
• 1Y: 44.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KBWP vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
KBWP Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF	-8.05%	11.49%	30.45%	1.88%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	10.94%	61.67%	32.86%	2.35%

Correlation

The correlation between KBWP and GSIB is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2023	0.30

The correlation between KBWP and GSIB shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.30 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KBWP vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

KBWP vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

KBWP

KBWP Risk / Return Rank: 4
KBWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
KBWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
KBWP Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KBWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
KBWP Martin Ratio Rank: 3

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 72
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 72
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

KBWP vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF (KBWP) 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.

	KBWP	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.41	2.63	-3.03
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.45	3.61	-4.06
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.44	-0.49
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.60	3.25	-3.85
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.19	11.47	-12.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KBWP vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBWP Sharpe Ratio is -0.41, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBWP 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KBWP	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.41	2.63	-3.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	2.39	-1.70

Drawdowns

KBWP vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBWP drawdown since its inception was -39.76%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBWP and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBWP	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.76%	-17.71%	-22.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.41%	-13.90%	+4.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.29%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.00%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.81%	0.00%	-8.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.36%	-2.06%	-2.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.78%	3.94%	+0.84%

Volatility

KBWP vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF (KBWP) is 4.10%, while Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a volatility of 5.55%. This indicates that KBWP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBWP	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	5.55%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.41%	13.92%	-2.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.21%	17.19%	-0.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.52%	18.45%	+0.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.70%	18.45%	+2.25%

KBWP vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both KBWP and GSIB have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

Dividends

KBWP vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

KBWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.02%, more than GSIB's 1.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.72%	1.91%	1.67%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
KBWP Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF	2.02%	1.58%	1.64%	1.68%	1.99%	3.02%	1.93%	1.99%	2.11%	1.90%	2.14%	1.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KBWP and GSIB in my portfolio?

KBWP and GSIB have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KBWP or GSIB?

GSIB has higher volatility (5.55%) compared to KBWP (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBWP dropped -39.76% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, KBWP or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 44.95% vs -6.56% for KBWP. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, KBWP has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBWP or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 44.95% return vs -6.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBWP or GSIB?

KBWP and GSIB have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

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

KBWP has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 1.72% for GSIB.

What is the main difference between KBWP and GSIB?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Themes.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs -0.41), 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.