^XAU vs. GDXJ

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index (^XAU) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ).

GDXJ is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. It was launched on Nov 10, 2009.

Performance

^XAU vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index (^XAU) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

^XAU vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
^XAU Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index	13.79%	149.51%	9.14%	4.00%	-8.75%	-8.14%	34.86%	51.32%	-17.13%	8.13%
GDXJ VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF	10.08%	172.28%	15.67%	7.12%	-14.53%	-21.25%	30.40%	40.44%	-11.02%	8.22%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ^XAU achieves a 13.79% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's 10.08% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ^XAU having a 18.77% annualized return and GDXJ not far behind at 17.88%.

^XAU

• 1D: 4.08%
• 1M: -17.00%
• YTD: 13.79%
• 6M: 29.50%
• 1Y: 119.66%
• 3Y*: 43.63%
• 5Y*: 22.72%
• 10Y*: 18.77%

GDXJ

• 1D: 4.34%
• 1M: -19.21%
• YTD: 10.08%
• 6M: 28.26%
• 1Y: 125.16%
• 3Y*: 49.66%
• 5Y*: 23.75%
• 10Y*: 17.88%

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

Return for Risk

^XAU vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

^XAU

^XAU Risk / Return Rank: 96
^XAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
^XAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
^XAU Omega Ratio Rank: 96
^XAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
^XAU Martin Ratio Rank: 95

GDXJ

GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 92
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 89
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

^XAU vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index (^XAU) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.

	^XAU	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.66	2.47	+0.18
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.76	2.63	+0.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.38	+0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	3.77	+0.20
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.42	13.05	+1.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

^XAU vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ^XAU Sharpe Ratio is 2.66, which is comparable to the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ^XAU and GDXJ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	^XAU	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.66	2.47	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64	0.59	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51	0.40	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.08	0.08	0.00

Correlation

The correlation between ^XAU and GDXJ is 0.94, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Drawdowns

^XAU vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ^XAU drawdown since its inception was -83.04%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ^XAU and GDXJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	^XAU	GDXJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.04%	-88.66%	+5.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.21%	-32.92%	+2.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.52%	-51.76%	+6.24%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.52%	-57.77%	+12.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.20%	-19.81%	+2.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-39.84%	-60.90%	+21.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.31%	9.51%	-1.20%

Volatility

^XAU vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index (^XAU) is 16.56%, while VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 19.46%. This indicates that ^XAU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	^XAU	GDXJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.56%	19.46%	-2.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	37.63%	42.52%	-4.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	45.31%	50.91%	-5.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.68%	40.57%	-4.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.62%	44.46%	-7.84%