© 2026 Sparkline Capital LP. All rights reserved.

For informational purposes only. Not investment advice or a recommendation of any security or fund. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Disclosures | Methodology |

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Selection

Selected (1/4)

GOIAX

Seeded with the selected fund at 100%

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

Asset Allocation Funds · 1,365 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

GOIAX

Goldman Sachs Moderate Allocation Fund

Expense Ratio
1.02%
AUM
$1.1B
Inception
12/31/1997
1Y Return
+9.9%53rd %ilevs 1,365 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests approximately 60% of its assets in underlying equity funds and about 40% in underlying fixed income funds, with allocations adjustable by up to 15%. It may also invest up to 20% in underlying alternative funds, which include real estate, infrastructure, commodities, and currencies. The fund operates as a fund-of-funds, with the ability to invest directly in various securities and derivatives, and measures performance against the Moderate Allocation Composite Index.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
GOIAX
Goldman Sachs Moderate Allocation Fund
9.9%9.9%9.7%0.64-7.2%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 10/7/2025 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
GOIAX
Goldman Sachs Moderate Allocation Fund
7.6%0.0%1.2%-0.8%0.8%8.3%9.9%11.2%14.8%6.8%5.7%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.

Annual Returns

Name
1998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
GOIAX
Goldman Sachs Moderate Allocation Fund
6.6%15.8%-4.6%-7.2%-8.4%24.6%14.8%8.5%13.9%5.1%-32.0%25.9%10.1%-3.4%12.4%13.1%2.2%0.5%4.6%16.6%-8.9%18.6%12.3%12.3%-15.5%14.9%11.0%15.6%7.6%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.

Correlation Matrix

Benchmark

Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.

Factor Regression

Name
Ann. αβ MKTβ SMBβ HMLβ RMWβ CMAβ UMDβ iHMLR²Obs
GOIAXUS
Goldman Sachs Moderate Allocation Fund
-0.1%0.70**-0.02-0.010.000.14**0.01-0.09**0.93226
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. US factor set. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth). From 10/7/2025 to 8/31/2026.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund Profile

Fund Documents(opens the fund company’s site in a new tab)
Family
Registrant
Type
Mutual Fund
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Asset Allocation
Region
Equity Size & Style
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
MSCI ® ACWI Index (Net, USD, Unhedged)
Peer Group
Allocation - Moderate (277 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
74
3Y Peer Percentile
76
Expense Ratio
1.02%
5Y Tax Drag
1.69%/yr
AUM
$1.1B
3Y Flow
+11.8%
Yield
2.10%
Inception
12/31/1997
Holdings (Reported)
11,476
Turnover
19%
Equity
82%
Derivatives
0%
Option Notional
4%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests approximately 60% of its assets in underlying equity funds and about 40% in underlying fixed income funds, with allocations adjustable by up to 15%. It may also invest up to 20% in underlying alternative funds, which include real estate, infrastructure, commodities, and currencies. The fund operates as a fund-of-funds, with the ability to invest directly in various securities and derivatives, and measures performance against the Moderate Allocation Composite Index.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the fund's prospectus fee table; tax drag from its after-tax return table. Turnover from the SEC annual report (3/4/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 6/30/2026. Strategy summary from the fund's prospectus.

Equity Size & Style Map

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
15%
23%
37%
5%
5%
4%
4%
3%
3%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
75%
Mid
14%
Small
11%
Style
Value
25%
Core
31%
Growth
45%
ⓘ Methodology

Equity size and style definitions. Size: each holding is scored against its own market's size curve — Large above $61.7B in the US and $21.4B elsewhere, Small below $10.8B worldwide — and a fund sits at the weighted average of its holdings. Style: each holding's Traditional Value score is ranked against stocks of the same region and size, and a fund sits at the weighted average of those ranks. Both are relative measures — where a holding stands among comparable stocks, not an absolute threshold. The dollar lines are recomputed from total market capitalisation each time the data is refreshed; the shares of the market they mark are what stay fixed. Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box. The grid and the dot are built from one set of per-holding scores — the dot is their weighted average — so they describe the same book at two levels of detail. The Size and Style bars are the grid's row and column totals. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite FactorsRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

Intangible Value50.0
Traditional Value47.2
Small-Cap47.1
Quality61.0
Momentum49.9
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Ranked within the clean equity fund universe, one entry per fund series (lowest: 0, highest: 100; the middle of the range is denser than the ends). Blue dots mark the fund; the shaded band spans the Asset Allocation Funds class 25th–75th percentile of scores, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)30.7
Sales-to-Price (NTM)43.5
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)5.4
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap1.8
Patents / Mkt Cap1.2
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap2.5
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.07
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap4.1
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap8.3
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap11.4
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap1.0
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); the shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Asset Allocation Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 9/30/2026.

Asset Class Exposure

Equity78.9%
Fixed Income16.1%
Cash & Short-Term3.6%
Other1.4%
Short positions of 0.1% of net assets are not shown.ⓘ Methodology

Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. Holdings that are themselves funds are looked through one level to their own mix (79% of the book). Cash & Short-Term includes 3.1% of net assets the filing does not itemise. The short book is stated under the card and never netted into a slice: a pie cannot draw a negative, and folding a hedge into the class it offsets would make it look like more of that class. Other is everything we could not name as an asset class: holdings the filing itself labels as other, derivative positions at the market value the filing reports rather than at notional, and funds held inside this fund whose own holdings we could not read. Alternatives holds funds counted by what they are rather than by what they hold - alternative strategies, and funds that are short. A pie cannot draw a negative, and adding a hedge to the class it offsets would make it look like more of that class.

Country Exposure

Level
71.1%
70.9%
Other0.2%
20.6%
4.5%
3.5%
1.8%
1.8%
1.8%
1.3%
1.1%
1.0%
Other4.0%
8.3%
1.9%
1.5%
1.4%
Other3.5%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

Technology26.9%
Financials18.1%
Industrials12.4%
Consumer Discretionary9.5%
Healthcare9.0%
Communication7.5%
Consumer Staples4.3%
Energy4.3%
Materials3.0%
Utilities2.9%
Real Estate2.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified holdings — every position we can identify, with cash and unidentified positions excluded — not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure37.5%
Early Adopter23.8%
Laggard38.7%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 718.3%
Non-Magnificent 781.7%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy55.5%
New Economy44.5%

Globalization

Multinational57.1%
Exporter7.5%
Importer12.4%
Domestic23.0%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled2.2%
Revenue & Operations8.8%
Operations Only12.2%
Revenue Only4.4%
No Material Exposure72.4%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)30.7%
Large ($70–500B)32.6%
Mid ($10–70B)26.4%
Small ($1–10B)9.7%
Micro (<$1B)0.5%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 82% of net assets) — they are not portfolio weights. China exposure: domiciled = incorporated in China or Hong Kong, falling back to the filing's country for holdings outside the stock model. Among the rest, revenue = ≥15% of revenue derived from China; operations = ≥3% of LinkedIn-tracked workforce in China, or ≥2 identified Chinese suppliers making up ≥12% of those identified. China revenue is estimated where segment reporting is absent. Company size bands by holding market cap: Mega >$500B, Large $70–500B, Mid $10–70B, Small $1–10B, Micro <$1B. Old vs New Economy partitions Sparkline's 48 industries: New = technology, internet platforms and entertainment, e-commerce, payments, pharma/biotech/medtech, and renewable energy; Old = everything else. Shares are of classified holdings and sum to 100%. China shares are of total equity weight. Size shares are of scored holdings weight. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

158 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings) · 76.5% in funds

#NameTickerWeight %Country
1Goldman Sachs Global Core Fixed Income-
17.52
USA
2Goldman Sachs MarketBeta US Equity ETFGSUS
11.65
USA
3Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond EtfGIGB
10.20
USA
4Goldman Sachs Large Cap Value Insights FundGCLSX
9.63
USA
5Goldman Sachs Large Cap Growth Insights FundGLCGX
9.54
USA
6Goldman Sachs International Equity Insights FundGCIAX
7.40
USA
7Goldman Sachs MarketBeta International Equity ETFGSID
5.93
USA
8Goldman Sachs Emerging Markets Equity Insights FundGERCX
3.18
USA
9Goldman Sachs Inflation Protected Securities FundGSAPX
2.87
USA
10Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETFGSLC
2.76
USA
ⓘ Methodology

Sector, country and factor detail need a security match; the share of weight that matched is a member figure, so the rows without one appear here with those columns blank. "In funds" adds up the rows tagged Fund — holdings that are themselves funds this app covers, which is what look-through can expand; a held vehicle that files no holdings of its own (a commodity or currency trust, a money-market fund) is not counted and stays a single line. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Total Holdings11,476
Effective Holdings10.7
Top 10 Weight80.7%
Max Position17.5%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)97%
Top Country (of Net Assets)97%
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for definitions. Solid blue dots mark the fund: percentage rows on a 0–100% scale, holdings counts log-scaled across the clean-universe 5th–95th percentile range. The shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Asset Allocation Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026.

Benchmark DifferentiationRef: Asset Allocation Funds

vs SPYBroad Benchmark
Active Share100.0%
Tracking Error8.2%
Benchmark Correlation0.95
ⓘ Methodology

One sub-card per benchmark: the market primary, then the style secondary — the gap between them is the style sleeve itself. Both anchors are Sparkline-inferred (market from asset class and region, style from the holdings size-and-style map), not the fund's official prospectus benchmark. Solid blue dot marks the fund; the shaded band spans the reference set's 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median (band follows the Peer Universe selector). Active Share compares the fund's book with the benchmark's, share for share; Tracking Error is the annualized daily deviation over the trailing two years (ruler runs to just past the universe's 95th percentile, or past the fund's own figure where that is larger); Benchmark Correlation is the plain daily correlation over the trailing year. Hover the labels for full definitions.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
GOIAX
Goldman Sachs Moderate Allocation Fund
Peer Group
277 funds
Peer Asset Class
1,365 funds
YTD Return
7.61%5.53%717.49%51
1Y Return
9.95%7.28%749.48%53
3Y Return (Ann.)
14.78%12.45%7614.23%54
5Y Return (Ann.)
6.80%5.28%746.38%55
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.02%0.90%340.80%27
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (878 share classes across 277 funds). One share class shown per fund — the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class; percentile ranks and medians are computed against the same deduped set. Quartile chips fill the layer the fund's rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). Funds without a full return history rank only on the horizons they cover.

Similar Funds

See more rows — create a free account▾

Nearest funds across the whole universe, by holdings and behavior — the peer taxonomy is ignored, so matches can come from any category.

Top Similarity71
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1GIPAX
Goldman Sachs Conservative Allocation Fund
Allocation - Conservative
Allocation - Conservative
71-----
2GGSAX
Goldman Sachs Growth Allocation Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
62-----
3PFJDX
PFG JP Morgan Tactical Moderate Strategy Fund
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
50-----
4TLHIX
Nuveen Lifecycle Index 2030 Fund
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
50-----
5ELM
Elm Market Navigator ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
50-----
6SWYFX
Schwab Target 2035 Index Fund
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
50-----
7SWYGX
Schwab Target 2040 Index Fund
Target Date 2040 & 2045
Target Date 2040 & 2045
50-----
8SWDRX
Schwab Target 2030 Fund
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
50-----
9BETFX
Morningstar Balanced ETF Asset Allocation Portfolio
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
50-----
10LEJAX
BlackRock LifePath ESG Index 2035 Fund
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
50-----

The method columns are members-only — create a free account to see these figures.

ⓘ Methodology

Rows are the consensus top matches (a fund must place in at least two methods' top 250 to qualify, and matches missing more than one of this fund's own methods are not ranked — a row scored on fewer methods is a noisier estimate, not a better match). Click a method column to see that method's own top matches across the whole universe instead. Gray (N) beside each method's metric is that fund's rank in the whole universe on that method. Similarity is a percentile among match-grade fund pairs, 0–100 — 87 means the pair is closer than 87% of the strongest matches in the universe, averaged across the methods — so it compares across funds: index clones tie at the top with thousands of other clone pairs, so scores top out in the high 80s to 90s, while a one-of-a-kind fund's best match can score in the 30s. Rows are ordered by the Consensus Rank — the geometric mean of those universe ranks, shown in each cell's tooltip — and the score is held down the list to the level of the closest match above it, so equal scores mean equally close and the number reads as a floor. A dash means that method has no figure for the pair at all (one of them lacks the holdings or return history it needs). Hover a column header for each method's definition. The “Top…” strips above compare against every fund's own top match across the whole universe (they deliberately don't follow the Peer Universe selector); Top Similarity is simply the best match's score, with no reference band; the Holdings and Active Tilt strips carry no reference band because computing every fund's best book overlap would require a full holdings scan per fund — the dot stands alone on its natural 0–100% scale. One share class shown per fund, and a fund's own sister share classes are excluded from its Top-match strips. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Consensus Rank is the geometric mean of the match's universe-wide rank across the methods (#1.0 = top match on every one). Holdings Overlap = common-holdings weight (sum of the minimum weight across shared positions, long only). Active Tilt Overlap = the same statistic on active weights (holdings minus the fund's own default benchmark, floored at 0), which strips the benchmark ballast that dominates raw overlap. Factor Similarity = 100 − a signature-weighted RMS gap across the composite factor scores (0–100 ranks within the clean equity fund universe), each axis weighted by how far this fund sits from the universe median of 50. Return Correlation = correlation of market-hedged daily returns over the trailing two years (CAPM residuals), so only market-beta co-movement is removed; requires ~18 months of daily history (378 of the window's 504 trading days). Fama-French Similarity = 1/(1+d), where d is the Euclidean distance between factor betas (market, size, value, profitability, investment, momentum, intangible value) from up to three years of daily returns (min 378 daily observations and regression R² of at least 0.25); 1.00 = identical loadings.