BAR vs. FALN
BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) and FALN (iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAR is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while FALN is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US High Yield Fallen Angel 3% Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAR returned 17.20%/yr vs 3.39%/yr for FALN. Their 0.20 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BAR charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FALN.
Performance
BAR vs. FALN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BAR achieves a -6.21% return, which is significantly lower than FALN's 1.86% return.
BAR
- 1D
- -1.51%
- 1M
- -1.73%
- 6M
- -16.49%
- YTD
- -6.21%
- 1Y
- 20.39%
- 3Y*
- 27.47%
- 5Y*
- 17.20%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.26%
FALN
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- -0.92%
- 6M
- 0.86%
- YTD
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- 6.24%
- 3Y*
- 8.53%
- 5Y*
- 3.39%
- 10Y*
- 6.24%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.52%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $8.48M | $7.76M | $9.82M | |
| $23.72M | $18.39M | $26.66M |
BAR vs. FALN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | -6.21% | 64.12% | 26.97% | 12.96% | -0.55% | -3.92% | 25.02% | 18.16% | -1.87% | -0.79% |
FALN iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF | 1.86% | 8.92% | 7.68% | 13.47% | -13.79% | 5.40% | 14.85% | 17.42% | -4.97% | 2.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAR and FALN is 0.31, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2017 | 0.20 |
The correlation between BAR and FALN shifts across timeframes, from 0.20 (all time) to 0.31 (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
BAR vs. FALN — Risk / Return Rank
BAR
FALN
BAR vs. FALN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) and iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN). 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.
| BAR | FALN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.26 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.87 | 1.57 | -0.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.88 | 6.42 | -4.53 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BAR vs. FALN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAR drawdown since its inception was -26.32%, smaller than the maximum FALN drawdown of -29.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAR and FALN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAR | FALN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.32% | -29.22% | +2.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.32% | -3.96% | -22.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.32% | -5.92% | -20.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.32% | -18.78% | -7.54% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -29.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.04% | -1.07% | -23.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.75% | -3.28% | -3.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.15% | 0.97% | +11.18% |
Volatility
BAR vs. FALN - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) has a higher volatility of 6.32% compared to iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) at 0.99%. This indicates that BAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FALN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAR | FALN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.32% | 0.99% | +5.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.33% | 3.79% | +19.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.91% | 4.59% | +23.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.38% | 7.33% | +11.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.61% | 8.86% | +7.75% |
BAR vs. FALN - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAR has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than FALN's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
BAR vs. FALN - Dividend Comparison
BAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FALN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.51%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FALN iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF | 5.98% | 6.31% | 6.24% | 5.37% | 5.08% | 3.40% | 5.14% | 5.35% | 5.97% | 6.98% | 3.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BAR and FALN have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BAR has higher volatility (6.32%) compared to FALN (0.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAR dropped -26.32% vs FALN's -29.22%.
On 5-year performance, BAR leads with 17.20% vs 3.39% for FALN. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, FALN has been the lower-risk option at 0.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, BAR has performed better with a 17.20% return vs 3.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FALN.
FALN has the higher dividend yield at 5.98%, compared with 0.00% for BAR.
BAR is categorized as Gold, while FALN is High Yield Bonds. BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while FALN tracks Bloomberg US High Yield Fallen Angel 3% Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for BAR and 0.25% for FALN.
FALN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 0.82), 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 BAR and FALN
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