PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MLN vs. GSG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MLN vs. GSG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLN (VanEck Long Muni ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - MLN is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg AMT-Free Long Continuous, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLN returned 1.49%/yr vs 7.69%/yr for GSG. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. MLN charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.

Performance

MLN vs. GSG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) 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, MLN achieves a 1.92% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return. Over the past 10 years, MLN has underperformed GSG with an annualized return of 1.49%, while GSG has yielded a comparatively higher 7.69% annualized return.

MLN

1D
-0.26%
1M
0.46%
YTD
1.92%
6M
2.58%
1Y
9.33%
3Y*
3.46%
5Y*
-1.05%
10Y*
1.49%

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

MLN vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MLN
VanEck Long Muni ETF		1.92%1.82%1.54%8.05%-17.20%2.20%6.22%10.72%-0.77%8.19%
GSG
iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust		42.58%5.93%8.52%-5.51%24.08%38.77%-23.94%15.62%-13.88%3.89%

Correlation

The correlation between MLN and GSG is -0.17, 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

-0.17

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.08

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.05

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2008

-0.09

The correlation between MLN and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.05 (5 years), 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.

VanEck Long Muni ETF

iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust

Often compared with MLN:
MLN vs. SGOVMLN vs. HYMUMLN vs. LKORMLN vs. VCLTMLN vs. TLTMLN vs. EMNTMLN vs. BLV
Often compared with GSG:
GSG vs. DBCGSG vs. PDBCGSG vs. COMTGSG vs. VCMDXGSG vs. GLDGSG vs. HGERGSG vs. CGL.TO

Return for Risk

MLN vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MLN
MLN Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
MLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLN Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
MLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLN Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
GSG
GSG Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
GSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSG Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
GSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSG Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MLN vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) 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.

MLNGSGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.11

2.26

-0.15

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.15

2.88

+0.28

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.40

+0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.66

5.47

-1.81

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.02

14.39

-2.37

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLN vs. GSG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is comparable to the GSG Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLN 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

MLNGSGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.11

2.26

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.14

0.70

-0.84

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.17

0.35

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.32

-0.09

+0.41

Drawdowns

MLN vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLN drawdown since its inception was -28.36%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLN and GSG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MLNGSGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.36%

-89.62%

+61.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.56%

-9.46%

+6.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.84%

-14.94%

+5.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.46%

-29.12%

+4.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.46%

-57.64%

+33.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.58%

-56.95%

+50.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.73%

-63.71%

+57.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.78%

3.59%

-2.81%

Volatility

MLN vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) is 1.56%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.65%. This indicates that MLN 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

MLNGSGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.56%

7.65%

-6.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.19%

20.42%

-17.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.45%

22.95%

-18.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.31%

22.61%

-15.30%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.88%

22.03%

-13.15%

MLN vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLN has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLN vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison

MLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GSG
iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MLN
VanEck Long Muni ETF		3.71%3.73%3.59%3.19%2.67%2.52%2.69%2.98%3.09%2.91%3.16%3.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

MLN and GSG 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.

GSG has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to MLN (1.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLN dropped -28.36% vs GSG's -89.62%.

On 10-year performance, GSG leads with 7.69% vs 1.49% for MLN. On fees, MLN is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, MLN has been the lower-risk option at 1.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GSG has performed better with a 7.69% return vs 1.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MLN is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.

MLN has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.

MLN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while GSG is Commodities. MLN tracks Bloomberg AMT-Free Long Continuous, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for MLN and 0.75% for GSG.

GSG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 2.11), 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 MLN 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