MARW vs. GSG
MARW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Mar ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - MARW is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. MARW is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MARW returned 11.31%/yr vs 19.31%/yr for GSG. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MARW charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
MARW vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MARW achieves a 5.01% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return.
MARW
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 1.59%
- YTD
- 5.01%
- 6M
- 5.94%
- 1Y
- 12.91%
- 3Y*
- 11.31%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -4.83%
- YTD
- 42.58%
- 6M
- 41.06%
- 1Y
- 51.52%
- 3Y*
- 19.31%
- 5Y*
- 15.74%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
MARW vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MARW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Mar ETF | 5.01% | 10.61% | 11.11% | 11.83% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 42.58% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -2.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between MARW and GSG is -0.27, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2023 | 0.01 |
The correlation between MARW and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.27 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MARW vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
MARW
GSG
MARW vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Mar ETF (MARW) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
| MARW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.71 | 1.40 | +0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.83 | 5.47 | -1.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.52 | 14.39 | +8.13 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MARW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.07 | 2.26 | +0.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.97 | -0.09 | +2.05 |
Drawdowns
MARW vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MARW drawdown since its inception was -7.58%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARW and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MARW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.58% | -89.62% | +82.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.39% | -9.46% | +6.07% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.58% | -14.94% | +7.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.12% | -56.95% | +56.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.48% | -63.71% | +63.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.57% | 3.59% | -3.02% |
Volatility
MARW vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Mar ETF (MARW) is 0.71%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.65%. This indicates that MARW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MARW | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.71% | 7.65% | -6.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.37% | 20.42% | -17.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.23% | 22.95% | -18.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.10% | 22.61% | -16.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.10% | 22.03% | -15.93% |
MARW vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MARW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
MARW vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
Neither MARW nor GSG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MARW and GSG have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to MARW (0.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARW dropped -7.58% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 3-year performance, GSG leads with 19.31% vs 11.31% for MARW. On fees, MARW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, MARW has been the lower-risk option at 0.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GSG has performed better with a 19.31% return vs 11.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MARW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
MARW and GSG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
MARW is categorized as Options Trading, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for MARW and 0.75% for GSG.
MARW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.07 vs 2.26), 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.
Find the right allocation for MARW and GSG
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