SMH vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index, while GSIB is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Themes. SMH is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, SMH returned 137.42% vs 41.62% for GSIB. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

SMH vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) 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, SMH achieves a 66.10% return, which is significantly higher than GSIB's 10.39% return.

SMH

• 1D: 5.00%
• 1M: 5.58%
• YTD: 66.10%
• 6M: 62.81%
• 1Y: 137.42%
• 3Y*: 60.43%
• 5Y*: 37.89%
• 10Y*: 36.92%

GSIB

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: 4.05%
• YTD: 10.39%
• 6M: 15.52%
• 1Y: 41.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SMH vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	66.10%	49.17%	39.10%	1.54%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	10.39%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between SMH and GSIB is 0.52, 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	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.44

The correlation between SMH and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

SMH vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMH	GSIB
Technology	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SMH vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMH

SMH Risk / Return Rank: 96
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 94
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 96

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 74
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 76
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

SMH vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) 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.

	SMH	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.27	2.41	+1.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.33	3.35	+0.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.62	1.40	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.26	3.01	+6.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	34.80	10.59	+24.21
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SMH vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMH Sharpe Ratio is 4.27, which is higher than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMH 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SMH	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.27	2.41	+1.86
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.08	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.13	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	2.36	-2.03

Drawdowns

SMH vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMH drawdown since its inception was -84.96%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMH and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMH	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-84.96%	-17.71%	-67.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.93%	-13.90%	-1.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.74%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.30%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.23%	-1.13%	-5.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-41.07%	-2.06%	-39.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.96%	3.94%	+0.02%

Volatility

SMH vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a higher volatility of 15.45% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 4.58%. This indicates that SMH'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

	SMH	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.45%	4.58%	+10.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.71%	14.13%	+12.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.42%	17.39%	+15.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.32%	18.46%	+16.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.75%	18.46%	+14.29%

SMH vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both SMH and GSIB have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

Dividends

SMH vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

SMH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, less than GSIB's 1.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.73%	1.91%	1.67%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	0.18%	0.31%	0.44%	0.60%	1.18%	0.51%	0.69%	1.50%	1.88%	1.43%	0.80%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMH and GSIB in my portfolio?

SMH and GSIB have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMH or GSIB?

SMH has higher volatility (15.45%) compared to GSIB (4.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMH dropped -84.96% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, SMH or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, SMH leads with 137.42% vs 41.62% for GSIB. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, GSIB has been the lower-risk option at 4.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMH or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, SMH has performed better with a 137.42% return vs 41.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMH or GSIB?

SMH and GSIB have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

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

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 0.18% for SMH.

What is the main difference between SMH and GSIB?

SMH is categorized as Semiconductors, while GSIB is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Themes.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.27 vs 2.41), 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.