PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MFSG vs. GSG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MFSG vs. GSG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFSG achieves a 3.45% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 38.94% return.


MFSG

1D
1.17%
1M
-1.11%
6M
4.16%
YTD
3.45%
1Y
8.76%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.79%

GSG

1D
0.28%
1M
12.94%
6M
25.75%
YTD
38.94%
1Y
42.34%
3Y*
14.13%
5Y*
14.47%
10Y*
8.91%
ALL TIME*
-2.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$16.60M$17.31M$26.52M
$1.55M$1.84M$2.29M

MFSG vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MFSG
MFS Active Growth ETF
3.45%14.51%-2.99%
GSG
iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust
38.94%5.93%3.22%

Correlation

The correlation between MFSG and GSG is -0.13, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


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

-0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2024

-0.05

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

MFSG vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFSG
MFSG Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
MFSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MFSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
MFSG Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
MFSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
MFSG Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

GSG
GSG Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
GSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSG Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
GSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSG Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
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.

MFSG vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) 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.

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.


MFSGGSGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.29

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.38

2.16

-1.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.26

6.99

-5.73

MFSG vs. GSG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFSG Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the GSG Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFSG and GSG, 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

MFSG vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFSG drawdown since its inception was -23.24%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFSG and GSG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MFSGGSGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.24%

-89.62%

+66.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.15%

-18.81%

+2.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.78%

-58.05%

+53.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.56%

-63.67%

+59.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.90%

5.84%

-0.94%

Volatility

MFSG vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) is 5.85%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 8.11%. This indicates that MFSG 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


MFSGGSGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.85%

8.11%

-2.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.61%

22.18%

-7.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.97%

24.23%

-6.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.83%

22.86%

-1.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.83%

22.06%

-0.23%

MFSG vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFSG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

MFSG vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison

MFSG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025
GSG
iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust
0.00%0.00%
MFSG
MFS Active Growth ETF
0.07%0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions


MFSG and GSG have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GSG has higher volatility (8.11%) compared to MFSG (5.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFSG dropped -23.24% vs GSG's -89.62%.

On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 42.34% vs 8.76% for MFSG. On fees, MFSG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, MFSG has been the lower-risk option at 5.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GSG has performed better with a 42.34% return vs 8.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MFSG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.

MFSG has the higher dividend yield at 0.07%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.

MFSG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: MFS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MFSG and 0.75% for GSG.

GSG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs 0.34), 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 MFSG 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