PAAA vs. GSIG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PAAA (PGIM AAA CLO ETF) and GSIG (Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate 1-5 Year Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAAA is a CLO fund actively managed by PGIM, while GSIG is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs US Investment-Grade Corporate Bond 1-5 Years Index. PAAA is actively managed, while GSIG is passively managed. Over the past year, PAAA returned 5.26% vs 4.54% for GSIG. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. PAAA charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for GSIG.

Performance

PAAA vs. GSIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM AAA CLO ETF (PAAA) and Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate 1-5 Year Bond ETF (GSIG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAAA achieves a 2.03% return, which is significantly higher than GSIG's 0.68% return.

PAAA

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.40%
• YTD: 2.03%
• 6M: 2.45%
• 1Y: 5.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GSIG

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 0.68%
• 6M: 1.01%
• 1Y: 4.54%
• 3Y*: 5.39%
• 5Y*: 2.18%
• 10Y*: —

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

PAAA vs. GSIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PAAA PGIM AAA CLO ETF	2.03%	5.37%	7.47%	3.83%
GSIG Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate 1-5 Year Bond ETF	0.68%	6.69%	4.72%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between PAAA and GSIG is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2023	-0.01

The correlation between PAAA and GSIG shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (all time) to 0.12 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PAAA vs. GSIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAAA

PAAA Risk / Return Rank: 99
PAAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
PAAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PAAA Omega Ratio Rank: 100
PAAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PAAA Martin Ratio Rank: 99

GSIG

GSIG Risk / Return Rank: 75
GSIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
GSIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
GSIG Omega Ratio Rank: 83
GSIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
GSIG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

PAAA vs. GSIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM AAA CLO ETF (PAAA) and Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate 1-5 Year Bond ETF (GSIG). 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.

	PAAA	GSIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	10.83	2.48	+8.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	21.80	3.83	+17.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	6.72	1.50	+5.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	30.32	3.13	+27.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	187.65	12.77	+174.87
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PAAA vs. GSIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAAA Sharpe Ratio is 10.83, which is higher than the GSIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAAA and GSIG, 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

	PAAA	GSIG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.83	2.48	+8.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	6.78	0.79	+5.99

Drawdowns

PAAA vs. GSIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAAA drawdown since its inception was -1.04%, smaller than the maximum GSIG drawdown of -9.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAAA and GSIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAAA	GSIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.04%	-9.57%	+8.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.17%	-1.46%	+1.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.57%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-0.31%	+0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.02%	-2.10%	+2.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.03%	0.36%	-0.33%

Volatility

PAAA vs. GSIG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM AAA CLO ETF (PAAA) is 0.11%, while Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate 1-5 Year Bond ETF (GSIG) has a volatility of 0.57%. This indicates that PAAA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAAA	GSIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.11%	0.57%	-0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.36%	1.35%	-0.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49%	1.84%	-1.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.98%	2.89%	-1.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.98%	2.71%	-1.73%

PAAA vs. GSIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAAA has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIG's 0.14% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PAAA vs. GSIG - Dividend Comparison

PAAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.88%, more than GSIG's 4.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GSIG Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate 1-5 Year Bond ETF	4.34%	4.61%	4.59%	3.51%	2.21%	1.04%	0.45%
PAAA PGIM AAA CLO ETF	4.88%	5.12%	5.88%	2.76%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAAA and GSIG in my portfolio?

PAAA and GSIG have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAAA or GSIG?

GSIG has higher volatility (0.57%) compared to PAAA (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAAA dropped -1.04% vs GSIG's -9.57%.

Which ETF is better, PAAA or GSIG?

On 1-year performance, PAAA leads with 5.26% vs 4.54% for GSIG. On fees, GSIG is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, PAAA has been the lower-risk option at 0.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAAA or GSIG?

Over the 1-year period, PAAA has performed better with a 5.26% return vs 4.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAAA or GSIG?

GSIG is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for PAAA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PAAA or GSIG?

PAAA has the higher dividend yield at 4.88%, compared with 4.34% for GSIG.

What is the main difference between PAAA and GSIG?

PAAA is categorized as CLO, while GSIG is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for PAAA and 0.14% for GSIG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PAAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.83 vs 2.48), 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.