GSC vs OMFS
Goldman Sachs Small Cap Equity ETF vs Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Which is better, GSC or OMFS?
GSC has been ahead.
OMFS has a lower expense ratio. GSC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. OMFS is less concentrated, with 12.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 16.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GSC | OMFS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.39%Best |
| AUM | $286M | $264M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.22% | 1.30% |
| Holdings | 197 | 2,228 |
| YTD Return | +11.66%Best | +10.28% |
| 1Y Return | +14.94%Best | +11.26% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.26%Best | +15.02% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +4.93% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.4% | 17.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -27.0% | -22.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 3 years | $15,577Best | $15,217 |
| Top 10 Weight | 16.3% | 12.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 3, 2023 | Nov 8, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 5, 2023 to Oct 15, 2026 (3 years).
GSC vs OMFS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 3 years both funds cover.
GSC vs OMFS Performance
Goldman Sachs Small Cap Equity ETF (GSC) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GSC returned +14.94% while OMFS returned +11.26%. Year to date, GSC is up 11.66% versus a gain of 10.28% for OMFS.
Over three years, GSC compounded at +15.26% per year against +15.02% for OMFS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GSC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% compared with 17.3% for OMFS. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -27.0% for GSC and -22.4% for OMFS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GSC charges 0.75% per year while OMFS charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $39 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GSC currently yields 0.22% against 1.30% for OMFS.
Holdings Overlap
55.4% of GSC's money is in holdings OMFS also owns. 12.1% of OMFS's money is in holdings GSC also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
51 positions in common, counted across the 98 positions we hold weights for in GSC and 933 in OMFS, against full books of 197 and 2,228.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 833 positions for OMFS that do not appear in our book for GSC (81.8% of the fund), and 41 for GSC that do not appear in OMFS (40.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GSC | Weight in OMFS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRNOTerreno Realty Corp | 1.57% | 1.17% | 0.40% |
| PIPRPiper Sandler Companies | 1.79% | 0.85% | 0.94% |
| EATBrinker Intl Inc | 1.05% | 1.15% | 0.10% |
| KRYSKrystal Biotech Inc | 1.21% | 0.98% | 0.23% |
| ALKS:IEAlkermes Plc. Ordinary Shares | 1.49% | 0.64% | 0.85% |
| MYRGMyrgroupinc. | 0.85% | 1.20% | 0.35% |
| NMIHNmi Holdings, Inc. (class A) | 1.49% | 0.36% | 1.13% |
| LTHLife Time Inc | 1.71% | 0.12% | 1.59% |
| VLYValley National Bancorp | 1.53% | 0.26% | 1.27% |
| TEXTerex Corp | 1.67% | 0.05% | 1.62% |
55.4% of GSC is already inside OMFS.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GSC or OMFS?
GSC has an expense ratio of 0.75% while OMFS charges 0.39%. OMFS is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GSC or OMFS?
Over the past year GSC returned +14.94% vs +11.26% for OMFS, so GSC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GSC or OMFS?
GSC has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 17.3% for OMFS. Worst drawdown: GSC -27.0% vs OMFS -22.4%.
Should I hold both GSC and OMFS?
GSC and OMFS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GSC and OMFS?
55.4% of GSC's money is in holdings OMFS also owns. 12.1% of OMFS's is in holdings GSC also owns. They hold 51 positions in common, counted across the 98 positions we hold weights for in GSC and 933 in OMFS.
Which pays a higher dividend, GSC or OMFS?
GSC yields 0.22% while OMFS yields 1.30%, so OMFS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OMFS better than GSC?
OMFS has a lower expense ratio. GSC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. OMFS is less concentrated, with 12.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 16.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.