Screener
KAT vs GHYB
Scharf ETF vs Goldman Sachs Access High Yield Corporate Bond ETF
Key differences
- GHYB costs 0.60% less per year.
- KAT is significantly larger than GHYB — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- KAT is classified as equity, while GHYB is fixed income — different risk/return profiles.
- KAT follows a active selection strategy; GHYB uses index tracking.
- KAT has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| KAT | GHYB | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.75% | 0.15% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $688M | $124M |
| Since | 2011 | 2017 |
| Dividend yield | 0.39% | 7.00% |
| Asset class | equity | fixed income |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +8.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +8.9% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +4.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.95 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 3.53% |
| Max drawdown | -9.25% | -21.48% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to KAT and GHYB
Explore further