AAAU vs. BGLD

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) and BGLD (FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price, while BGLD is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by FT Vest. AAAU is passively managed, while BGLD is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, AAAU returned 17.72%/yr vs 10.84%/yr for BGLD. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AAAU charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.91%/yr for BGLD.

Performance

AAAU vs. BGLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF (BGLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAAU achieves a 0.05% return, which is significantly higher than BGLD's -1.29% return.

AAAU

• 1D: -3.64%
• 1M: -8.02%
• YTD: 0.05%
• 6M: 2.64%
• 1Y: 28.42%
• 3Y*: 29.80%
• 5Y*: 17.72%
• 10Y*: —

BGLD

• 1D: -2.05%
• 1M: -2.51%
• YTD: -1.29%
• 6M: -0.81%
• 1Y: 11.33%
• 3Y*: 18.58%
• 5Y*: 10.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

AAAU vs. BGLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	0.05%	64.06%	26.91%	12.96%	-0.50%	-2.36%
BGLD FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF	-1.29%	33.03%	21.80%	13.24%	-2.42%	-5.57%

Correlation

The correlation between AAAU and BGLD is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2021	0.82

The correlation between AAAU and BGLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AAAU vs. BGLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

AAAU

AAAU Risk / Return Rank: 30
AAAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
AAAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
AAAU Omega Ratio Rank: 33
AAAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
AAAU Martin Ratio Rank: 27

BGLD

BGLD Risk / Return Rank: 26
BGLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
BGLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
BGLD Omega Ratio Rank: 29
BGLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
BGLD Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

AAAU vs. BGLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF (BGLD). 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.

	AAAU	BGLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.07	0.94	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.45	1.31	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.19	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	1.02	+0.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.62	3.19	+0.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AAAU vs. BGLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAAU Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is comparable to the BGLD Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAAU and BGLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AAAU	BGLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.07	0.94	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.99	1.09	-0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.06	1.01	+0.05

Drawdowns

AAAU vs. BGLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAAU drawdown since its inception was -21.63%, which is greater than BGLD's maximum drawdown of -16.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAAU and BGLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAAU	BGLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.63%	-16.19%	-5.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.00%	-11.11%	-8.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.00%	-11.11%	-8.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.94%	-15.52%	-5.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.00%	-8.70%	-11.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.19%	-3.65%	-2.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.86%	3.55%	+4.31%

Volatility

AAAU vs. BGLD - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) has a higher volatility of 5.66% compared to FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF (BGLD) at 2.74%. This indicates that AAAU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BGLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAAU	BGLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.66%	2.74%	+2.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.25%	10.22%	+13.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.59%	12.09%	+14.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.90%	10.01%	+7.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.04%	9.93%	+7.11%

AAAU vs. BGLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAAU has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BGLD's 0.91% expense ratio.

Dividends

AAAU vs. BGLD - Dividend Comparison

AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BGLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 44.90%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BGLD FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF	44.90%	44.32%	25.04%	10.49%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAAU and BGLD in my portfolio?

AAAU and BGLD have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AAAU or BGLD?

AAAU has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to BGLD (2.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAAU dropped -21.63% vs BGLD's -16.19%.

Which ETF is better, AAAU or BGLD?

On 5-year performance, AAAU leads with 17.72% vs 10.84% for BGLD. On fees, AAAU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BGLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AAAU or BGLD?

Over the 5-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 17.72% return vs 10.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAAU or BGLD?

AAAU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.91% for BGLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AAAU or BGLD?

BGLD has the higher dividend yield at 44.90%, compared with 0.00% for AAAU.

What is the main difference between AAAU and BGLD?

AAAU is categorized as Gold, while BGLD is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for AAAU and 0.91% for BGLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.07 vs 0.94), 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.