PAVE vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 19, 2026

PAVE (Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAVE is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the INDXX U.S. Infrastructure Development Index, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. PAVE is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, PAVE returned 40.49% vs 49.03% for GSIB. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAVE charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

PAVE vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE) 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, PAVE achieves a 22.54% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's 15.97% return.

PAVE

• 1D: 1.00%
• 1M: 8.91%
• YTD: 22.54%
• 6M: 22.06%
• 1Y: 40.49%
• 3Y*: 25.63%
• 5Y*: 19.69%
• 10Y*: —

GSIB

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 10.04%
• YTD: 15.97%
• 6M: 18.23%
• 1Y: 49.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PAVE vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PAVE Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF	22.54%	19.36%	17.92%	1.57%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	15.97%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between PAVE and GSIB is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.60

The correlation between PAVE and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

PAVE vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PAVE	GSIB
Industrials	75.1%	-
Basic Materials	20.1%	-
Utilities	3.2%	-
Technology	1.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.3%	-
Energy	0.3%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PAVE vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAVE

PAVE Risk / Return Rank: 69
PAVE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
PAVE Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
PAVE Omega Ratio Rank: 62
PAVE Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PAVE Martin Ratio Rank: 71

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 82
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 85
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

PAVE vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE) 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.

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.

	PAVE	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.83	-0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.92	3.89	-0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.47	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	3.54	-0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.43	12.48	-0.06

PAVE vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAVE Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAVE 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.

Drawdowns

PAVE vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAVE drawdown since its inception was -44.08%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAVE and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAVE	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.08%	-17.71%	-26.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.91%	-13.90%	+1.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.23%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.22%	-2.03%	-4.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.27%	3.94%	-0.67%

Volatility

PAVE vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF (PAVE) has a higher volatility of 6.43% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 5.27%. This indicates that PAVE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAVE	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.43%	5.27%	+1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.79%	14.36%	+1.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.44%	17.39%	+2.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.65%	18.47%	+3.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.39%	18.47%	+5.92%

PAVE vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAVE has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAVE vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

PAVE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.75%, less than GSIB's 1.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.64%	1.91%	1.67%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PAVE Global X US Infrastructure Development ETF	0.75%	0.92%	0.54%	0.68%	0.84%	0.48%	0.44%	0.67%	0.78%	0.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAVE and GSIB in my portfolio?

PAVE and GSIB have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAVE or GSIB?

PAVE has higher volatility (6.43%) compared to GSIB (5.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAVE dropped -44.08% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, PAVE or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 49.03% vs 40.49% for PAVE. On fees, GSIB is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 5.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAVE or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 49.03% return vs 40.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAVE or GSIB?

GSIB is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for PAVE.

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

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.64%, compared with 0.75% for PAVE.

What is the main difference between PAVE and GSIB?

PAVE is categorized as Industrials Equities, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for PAVE and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 2.09), 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.