XLF vs. GSIB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) and GSIB (Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. XLF is passively managed, while GSIB is actively managed. Over the past year, XLF returned 7.67% vs 48.44% for GSIB. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XLF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GSIB.

Performance

XLF vs. GSIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) 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, XLF achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 16.30% return.

XLF

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: 4.10%
• YTD: -0.77%
• 6M: -1.95%
• 1Y: 7.67%
• 3Y*: 19.94%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: 13.72%

GSIB

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 7.54%
• YTD: 16.30%
• 6M: 15.82%
• 1Y: 48.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XLF vs. GSIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	-0.77%	14.90%	30.56%	0.57%
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	16.30%	61.67%	32.86%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between XLF and GSIB is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023	0.68

The correlation between XLF and GSIB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLF vs. GSIB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XLF	GSIB
Financial Services	98.0%	100.0%
Technology	1.8%	-
Industrials	0.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XLF vs. GSIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLF

XLF Risk / Return Rank: 15
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 16
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 15

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 80
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 82
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

XLF vs. GSIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) 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.

	XLF	GSIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.53	2.80	-2.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.81	3.85	-3.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.47	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.52	3.50	-2.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.33	12.33	-11.01

XLF vs. GSIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLF Sharpe Ratio is 0.53, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLF 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

XLF vs. GSIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and GSIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLF	GSIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.69%	-17.71%	-64.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.79%	-13.90%	-0.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.54%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.64%	-0.60%	-3.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.99%	-2.03%	-17.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.79%	3.94%	+1.85%

Volatility

XLF vs. GSIB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.12%, while Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) has a volatility of 4.91%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XLF	GSIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.12%	4.91%	-0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.27%	14.38%	-3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.62%	17.41%	-2.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.58%	18.45%	+0.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.11%	18.45%	+3.66%

XLF vs. GSIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

XLF vs. GSIB - Dividend Comparison

XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, less than GSIB's 1.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.50%	1.31%	1.42%	1.71%	2.04%	1.63%	2.03%	1.87%	2.08%	1.48%	21.10%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLF and GSIB in my portfolio?

XLF and GSIB have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XLF or GSIB?

GSIB has higher volatility (4.91%) compared to XLF (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs GSIB's -17.71%.

Which ETF is better, XLF or GSIB?

On 1-year performance, GSIB leads with 48.44% vs 7.67% for XLF. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XLF or GSIB?

Over the 1-year period, GSIB has performed better with a 48.44% return vs 7.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XLF or GSIB?

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for GSIB.

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

GSIB has the higher dividend yield at 1.64%, compared with 1.50% for XLF.

What is the main difference between XLF and GSIB?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.35% for GSIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 0.53), 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.