AAAU vs. RING
AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) and RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) are both Gold funds - AAAU tracks the LBMA Gold PM Price while RING tracks the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AAAU returned 17.72%/yr vs 18.19%/yr for RING. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AAAU charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RING.
Performance
AAAU vs. RING - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AAAU achieves a 0.05% return, which is significantly higher than RING's -6.78% return.
AAAU
- 1D
- -3.64%
- 1M
- -8.02%
- YTD
- 0.05%
- 6M
- 2.64%
- 1Y
- 28.42%
- 3Y*
- 29.80%
- 5Y*
- 17.72%
- 10Y*
- —
RING
- 1D
- -8.49%
- 1M
- -14.48%
- YTD
- -6.78%
- 6M
- -0.55%
- 1Y
- 55.64%
- 3Y*
- 43.24%
- 5Y*
- 18.19%
- 10Y*
- 13.84%
AAAU vs. RING - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 0.05% | 64.06% | 26.91% | 12.96% | -0.50% | -4.01% | 25.02% | 18.17% | 9.20% |
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | -6.78% | 164.72% | 15.98% | 12.29% | -15.40% | -7.46% | 24.98% | 49.92% | 13.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAAU and RING is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2018 | 0.77 |
The correlation between AAAU and RING has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AAAU vs. RING — Risk / Return Rank
AAAU
RING
AAAU vs. RING - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING). 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 | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.22 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.43 | 1.81 | -0.38 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.62 | 4.69 | -1.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AAAU | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.07 | 1.20 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.99 | 0.50 | +0.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.38 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.06 | 0.09 | +0.97 |
Drawdowns
AAAU vs. RING - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAAU drawdown since its inception was -21.63%, smaller than the maximum RING drawdown of -79.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAAU and RING.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAAU | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.63% | -79.47% | +57.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -20.00% | -30.95% | +10.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.00% | -30.95% | +10.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.94% | -47.94% | +27.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -52.04% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.00% | -30.95% | +10.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.19% | -47.40% | +41.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.86% | 11.90% | -4.04% |
Volatility
AAAU vs. RING - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) is 5.66%, while iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) has a volatility of 15.42%. This indicates that AAAU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RING based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAAU | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.66% | 15.42% | -9.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.25% | 38.42% | -15.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.59% | 46.72% | -20.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.90% | 36.65% | -18.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.04% | 36.63% | -19.59% |
AAAU vs. RING - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAAU has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than RING's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
AAAU vs. RING - Dividend Comparison
AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | 0.90% | 0.84% | 1.43% | 2.01% | 2.29% | 2.38% | 0.83% | 0.83% | 0.70% | 0.42% | 1.41% | 0.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAAU and RING have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RING has higher volatility (15.42%) compared to AAAU (5.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAAU dropped -21.63% vs RING's -79.47%.
On 5-year performance, RING leads with 18.19% vs 17.72% for AAAU. On fees, AAAU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, AAAU has been the lower-risk option at 5.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RING has performed better with a 18.19% return vs 17.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AAAU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RING.
RING has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.00% for AAAU.
AAAU tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for AAAU and 0.39% for RING.
RING currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.20 vs 1.07), 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.
Find the right allocation for AAAU and RING
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer