AOR vs. GLDM
AOR (iShares Core 60/40 Balanced Allocation ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - AOR is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P Target Risk Growth Index, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AOR returned 6.68%/yr vs 17.58%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AOR charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.
Performance
AOR vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AOR achieves a 6.86% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's -5.33% return.
AOR
- 1D
- 0.63%
- 1M
- -0.89%
- 6M
- 6.37%
- YTD
- 6.86%
- 1Y
- 14.64%
- 3Y*
- 12.82%
- 5Y*
- 6.68%
- 10Y*
- 8.14%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.69%
GLDM
- 1D
- 1.96%
- 1M
- -3.14%
- 6M
- -14.15%
- YTD
- -5.33%
- 1Y
- 20.07%
- 3Y*
- 27.55%
- 5Y*
- 17.58%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 15.54%
AOR vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOR iShares Core 60/40 Balanced Allocation ETF | 6.86% | 16.44% | 10.68% | 15.75% | -15.64% | 11.19% | 11.42% | 18.91% | -4.72% |
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | -5.33% | 64.20% | 27.08% | 13.04% | -0.47% | -4.01% | 25.10% | 18.10% | 1.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between AOR and GLDM is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2018 | 0.22 |
The correlation between AOR and GLDM shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (all time) to 0.41 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
AOR vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank
AOR
GLDM
AOR vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core 60/40 Balanced Allocation ETF (AOR) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| AOR | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.15 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.21 | 0.77 | +1.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.38 | 1.78 | +7.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AOR vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AOR drawdown since its inception was -24.44%, smaller than the maximum GLDM drawdown of -26.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOR and GLDM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AOR | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.44% | -26.27% | +1.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.64% | -26.27% | +19.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.77% | -26.27% | +16.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.72% | -26.27% | +4.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.95% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.01% | -24.30% | +23.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.46% | -6.49% | +3.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.57% | 11.32% | -9.75% |
Volatility
AOR vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Core 60/40 Balanced Allocation ETF (AOR) is 2.49%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 6.75%. This indicates that AOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AOR | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.49% | 6.75% | -4.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.69% | 24.13% | -16.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.03% | 27.86% | -18.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.65% | 18.34% | -7.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.65% | 17.08% | -6.43% |
AOR vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison
AOR has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
AOR vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison
AOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOR iShares Core 60/40 Balanced Allocation ETF | 2.58% | 2.55% | 2.66% | 2.50% | 2.12% | 1.64% | 1.89% | 2.56% | 2.49% | 4.51% | 2.16% | 2.12% |
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AOR and GLDM have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLDM has higher volatility (6.75%) compared to AOR (2.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOR dropped -24.44% vs GLDM's -26.27%.
On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 17.58% vs 6.68% for AOR. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, AOR has been the lower-risk option at 2.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 17.58% return vs 6.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for AOR.
AOR has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.
AOR is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while GLDM is Gold. AOR tracks S&P Target Risk Growth Index, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for AOR and 0.10% for GLDM.
AOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 0.72), 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 AOR and GLDM
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