PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TRFM vs. GINN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TRFM vs. GINN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Transformers ETF (TRFM) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TRFM achieves a 30.30% return, which is significantly higher than GINN's 8.64% return.


TRFM

1D
-1.23%
1M
12.40%
YTD
30.30%
6M
29.25%
1Y
53.69%
3Y*
31.63%
5Y*
10Y*

GINN

1D
-1.29%
1M
5.38%
YTD
8.64%
6M
7.90%
1Y
25.65%
3Y*
19.95%
5Y*
6.82%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TRFM vs. GINN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
TRFM
AAM Transformers ETF
30.30%25.76%19.96%44.71%-7.38%
GINN
Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF
8.64%20.25%18.71%29.94%-4.07%

Correlation

The correlation between TRFM and GINN is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

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

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2022

0.93

The correlation between TRFM and GINN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

TRFM vs. GINN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
TRFM
GINN

Technology

53.3%
32.4%

Consumer Cyclical

17.7%
14.6%

Communication Services

12.3%
10.8%

Industrials

7.2%
6.1%

Energy

3.5%
1.4%

Financial Services

2.8%
11.4%

Utilities

1.7%
1.9%

Basic Materials

1.2%
0.1%

Healthcare

0.2%
18.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.0%

Real Estate

-

0.8%

Technology

TRFM
53.3%
GINN
32.4%

Consumer Cyclical

TRFM
17.7%
GINN
14.6%

Communication Services

TRFM
12.3%
GINN
10.8%

Industrials

TRFM
7.2%
GINN
6.1%

Energy

TRFM
3.5%
GINN
1.4%

Financial Services

TRFM
2.8%
GINN
11.4%

Utilities

TRFM
1.7%
GINN
1.9%

Basic Materials

TRFM
1.2%
GINN
0.1%

Healthcare

TRFM
0.2%
GINN
18.6%

Consumer Defensive

TRFM

-

GINN
2.0%

Real Estate

TRFM

-

GINN
0.8%

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

TRFM vs. GINN — Risk / Return Rank

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

TRFM
TRFM Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
TRFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRFM Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
TRFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRFM Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

GINN
GINN Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
GINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
GINN Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
GINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
GINN Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
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.

TRFM vs. GINN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Transformers ETF (TRFM) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). 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.


TRFMGINNDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.41

1.61

+0.80

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.04

2.25

+0.78

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.28

+0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.15

1.95

+2.20

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

14.09

7.06

+7.03

TRFM vs. GINN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TRFM Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is higher than the GINN Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TRFM and GINN, 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


TRFMGINNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.41

1.61

+0.80

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.05

0.45

+0.60

Drawdowns

TRFM vs. GINN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TRFM drawdown since its inception was -28.40%, smaller than the maximum GINN drawdown of -41.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRFM and GINN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TRFMGINNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.40%

-41.25%

+12.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.99%

-13.18%

+0.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.40%

-22.25%

-6.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.23%

-1.63%

+0.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.61%

-13.37%

+6.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.82%

3.64%

+0.18%

Volatility

TRFM vs. GINN - Volatility Comparison

AAM Transformers ETF (TRFM) has a higher volatility of 7.34% compared to Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN) at 3.98%. This indicates that TRFM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GINN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TRFMGINNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.34%

3.98%

+3.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.46%

12.04%

+5.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.47%

16.06%

+6.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.94%

21.33%

+5.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.94%

21.05%

+5.89%

TRFM vs. GINN - Expense Ratio Comparison

TRFM has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GINN's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

TRFM vs. GINN - Dividend Comparison

TRFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than GINN's 1.16% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
GINN
Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF
1.16%1.26%1.26%1.01%0.69%0.67%0.07%
TRFM
AAM Transformers ETF
0.13%0.17%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


TRFM and GINN have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TRFM has higher volatility (7.34%) compared to GINN (3.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TRFM dropped -28.40% vs GINN's -41.25%.

On 3-year performance, TRFM leads with 31.63% vs 19.95% for GINN. On fees, TRFM is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GINN has been the lower-risk option at 3.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, TRFM has performed better with a 31.63% return vs 19.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TRFM is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for GINN.

GINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.13% for TRFM.

TRFM tracks Pence Transformers Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while GINN tracks Solactive Innovative Global Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: AAM and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for TRFM and 0.50% for GINN.

TRFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.61), 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 TRFM and GINN

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