AVUV vs. GLTR

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

AVUV (Avantis US Small Cap Value ETF) and GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AVUV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Avantis, while GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. AVUV is actively managed, while GLTR is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AVUV returned 11.57%/yr vs 14.04%/yr for GLTR. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AVUV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.

Performance

AVUV vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Avantis US Small Cap Value ETF (AVUV) and abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AVUV achieves a 22.73% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's -4.66% return.

AVUV

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: 6.47%
• YTD: 22.73%
• 6M: 19.51%
• 1Y: 42.12%
• 3Y*: 19.24%
• 5Y*: 11.57%
• 10Y*: —

GLTR

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -9.08%
• YTD: -4.66%
• 6M: 0.76%
• 1Y: 38.86%
• 3Y*: 29.97%
• 5Y*: 14.04%
• 10Y*: 12.08%

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

AVUV vs. GLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AVUV Avantis US Small Cap Value ETF	22.73%	7.44%	9.28%	22.82%	-4.91%	42.20%	6.43%	8.54%
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	-4.66%	87.25%	20.63%	2.01%	-0.25%	-9.60%	29.52%	2.87%

Correlation

The correlation between AVUV and GLTR is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2019	0.19

Return for Risk

AVUV vs. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

AVUV

AVUV Risk / Return Rank: 84
AVUV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
AVUV Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
AVUV Omega Ratio Rank: 77
AVUV Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
AVUV Martin Ratio Rank: 85

GLTR

GLTR Risk / Return Rank: 30
GLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
GLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
GLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 38
GLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
GLTR 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.

AVUV vs. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Avantis US Small Cap Value ETF (AVUV) and abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). 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.

	AVUV	GLTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	1.04	+1.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.24	1.39	+1.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.22	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.06	1.17	+3.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.09	2.88	+12.21

AVUV vs. GLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AVUV Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is higher than the GLTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AVUV and GLTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AVUV vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AVUV drawdown since its inception was -49.42%, smaller than the maximum GLTR drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AVUV and GLTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	AVUV	GLTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.42%	-55.70%	+6.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.95%	-34.09%	+26.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.79%	-34.09%	+5.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.79%	-34.09%	+5.30%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-31.27%	+31.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.91%	-28.82%	+20.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.67%	13.86%	-11.19%

Volatility

AVUV vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Avantis US Small Cap Value ETF (AVUV) is 4.53%, while abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) has a volatility of 10.43%. This indicates that AVUV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AVUV	GLTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	10.43%	-5.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.34%	36.24%	-24.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.63%	38.40%	-20.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.75%	23.87%	-1.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.26%	20.64%	+7.62%

AVUV vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

AVUV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

AVUV vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison

AVUV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, while GLTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AVUV Avantis US Small Cap Value ETF	1.61%	1.58%	1.61%	1.65%	1.74%	1.28%	1.21%	0.38%
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AVUV and GLTR in my portfolio?

AVUV and GLTR have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AVUV or GLTR?

GLTR has higher volatility (10.43%) compared to AVUV (4.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AVUV dropped -49.42% vs GLTR's -55.70%.

Which ETF is better, AVUV or GLTR?

On 5-year performance, GLTR leads with 14.04% vs 11.57% for AVUV. On fees, AVUV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AVUV has been the lower-risk option at 4.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AVUV or GLTR?

Over the 5-year period, GLTR has performed better with a 14.04% return vs 11.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AVUV or GLTR?

AVUV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GLTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AVUV or GLTR?

AVUV has the higher dividend yield at 1.61%, compared with 0.00% for GLTR.

What is the main difference between AVUV and GLTR?

AVUV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while GLTR is Precious Metals. They also come from different issuers: Avantis and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AVUV and 0.60% for GLTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AVUV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.04), 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.