RMIF vs. GSG
RMIF (LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - RMIF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. RMIF is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RMIF returned 4.89%/yr vs 14.41%/yr for GSG. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMIF charges 1.38%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
RMIF vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RMIF achieves a -0.68% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 26.84% return.
RMIF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- YTD
- -0.68%
- 6M
- -0.49%
- 1Y
- 3.09%
- 3Y*
- 4.89%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- -12.03%
- YTD
- 26.84%
- 6M
- 26.40%
- 1Y
- 23.99%
- 3Y*
- 14.41%
- 5Y*
- 13.07%
- 10Y*
- 6.69%
RMIF vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF | -0.68% | 4.36% | 7.00% | 4.09% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 26.84% | 5.93% | 8.52% | 3.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between RMIF and GSG is -0.23, 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 | -0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023 | 0.01 |
The correlation between RMIF and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (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
RMIF vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
RMIF
GSG
RMIF vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) 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.
| RMIF | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.20 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.31 | 1.52 | -0.21 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.44 | 6.22 | -2.78 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RMIF vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RMIF drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMIF and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RMIF | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.01% | -89.62% | +86.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.37% | -15.88% | +13.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.01% | -15.88% | +12.87% |
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 | -1.14% | -61.70% | +60.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.40% | -63.69% | +63.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.90% | 4.46% | -3.56% |
Volatility
RMIF vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF) is 0.61%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 5.46%. This indicates that RMIF 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
| RMIF | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.61% | 5.46% | -4.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.01% | 20.81% | -18.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.66% | 23.19% | -20.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.59% | 22.66% | -20.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.59% | 22.03% | -19.44% |
RMIF vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
RMIF has a 1.38% expense ratio, which is higher than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
RMIF vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
RMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.29%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF | 5.29% | 5.70% | 6.61% | 3.70% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RMIF and GSG have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (5.46%) compared to RMIF (0.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMIF dropped -3.01% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 3-year performance, GSG leads with 14.41% vs 4.89% for RMIF. On fees, GSG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, RMIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.61%. 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 14.41% return vs 4.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.38% for RMIF.
RMIF has the higher dividend yield at 5.29%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
RMIF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.38% for RMIF and 0.75% for GSG.
RMIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 vs 1.04), 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 RMIF 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