ACCBX vs. AAAU
ACCBX (Invesco Corporate Bond Fund) and AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) are both funds - ACCBX is a Corporate Bonds fund managed by Invesco, while AAAU is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. Over the past 5 years, ACCBX returned 0.04%/yr vs 18.89%/yr for AAAU. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACCBX charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AAAU.
Performance
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACCBX achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly lower than AAAU's 4.00% return.
ACCBX
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 0.57%
- YTD
- 0.62%
- 6M
- 0.72%
- 1Y
- 6.63%
- 3Y*
- 5.28%
- 5Y*
- 0.04%
- 10Y*
- 2.96%
AAAU
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- -2.66%
- YTD
- 4.00%
- 6M
- 6.50%
- 1Y
- 32.47%
- 3Y*
- 31.82%
- 5Y*
- 18.89%
- 10Y*
- —
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACCBX Invesco Corporate Bond Fund | 0.62% | 7.34% | 2.87% | 7.01% | -16.72% | 0.31% | 11.43% | 15.78% | -1.93% |
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 4.00% | 64.06% | 26.91% | 12.96% | -0.50% | -4.01% | 25.02% | 18.17% | 9.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACCBX and AAAU is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2018 | 0.30 |
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
ACCBX vs. AAAU — Risk / Return Rank
ACCBX
AAAU
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Corporate Bond Fund (ACCBX) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). 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.
| ACCBX | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.55 | 1.24 | +0.31 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.29 | 1.64 | +0.66 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.25 | +0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.09 | 1.88 | +0.21 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.25 | 4.73 | +2.52 |
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
| ACCBX | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.55 | 1.24 | +0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 | 1.07 | -1.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.51 | 1.10 | -0.58 |
Drawdowns
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACCBX drawdown since its inception was -45.26%, which is greater than AAAU's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACCBX and AAAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACCBX | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.26% | -21.63% | -23.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.46% | -19.13% | +15.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.72% | -19.13% | +12.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.59% | -20.94% | -2.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.59% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.72% | -16.84% | +14.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.86% | -6.18% | -4.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.00% | 7.61% | -6.61% |
Volatility
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Corporate Bond Fund (ACCBX) is 1.43%, while Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) has a volatility of 5.76%. This indicates that ACCBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACCBX | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.43% | 5.76% | -4.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.04% | 22.92% | -19.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.09% | 26.43% | -22.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.28% | 17.85% | -11.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.73% | 16.99% | -11.26% |
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACCBX has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than AAAU's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACCBX vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison
ACCBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.00%, while AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| 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% |
ACCBX Invesco Corporate Bond Fund | 5.00% | 4.95% | 4.63% | 3.78% | 3.84% | 4.91% | 5.98% | 3.67% | 4.22% | 4.13% | 3.64% | 3.88% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACCBX and AAAU have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAAU has higher volatility (5.76%) compared to ACCBX (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACCBX dropped -45.26% vs AAAU's -21.63%.
ACCBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 1.24), 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 ACCBX and AAAU
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