PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAR vs. GDXJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BAR vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAR achieves a -6.10% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -13.28% return.


BAR

1D
0.13%
1M
-1.60%
6M
-12.98%
YTD
-6.10%
1Y
20.54%
3Y*
27.61%
5Y*
17.26%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
13.26%

GDXJ

1D
3.44%
1M
-4.12%
6M
-20.48%
YTD
-13.28%
1Y
55.23%
3Y*
43.15%
5Y*
18.66%
10Y*
8.85%
ALL TIME*
1.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$8.15M$7.49M$9.63M
$470.71M$441.62M$622.38M

BAR vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BAR
GraniteShares Gold Trust
-6.10%64.12%26.97%12.96%-0.55%-3.92%25.02%18.16%-1.87%-0.79%
GDXJ
VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF
-13.28%172.28%15.67%7.12%-14.53%-21.25%30.40%40.44%-11.02%-2.23%

Correlation

The correlation between BAR and GDXJ is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2017

0.77

The correlation between BAR and GDXJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.81 - 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

BAR vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BAR
BAR Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
BAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAR Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
BAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAR Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

GDXJ
GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BAR vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.


BARGDXJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.20

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.78

1.34

-0.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.68

2.83

-1.15

BAR vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAR Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is comparable to the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAR and GDXJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BAR vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAR drawdown since its inception was -26.32%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAR and GDXJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BARGDXJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.32%

-88.66%

+62.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.32%

-41.32%

+15.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.32%

-41.32%

+15.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.32%

-48.79%

+22.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-24.94%

-36.83%

+11.89%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.76%

-60.25%

+53.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

12.26%

19.56%

-7.30%

Volatility

BAR vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) is 5.98%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 14.46%. This indicates that BAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BARGDXJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.98%

14.46%

-8.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.76%

42.31%

-21.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.90%

54.05%

-26.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.38%

42.11%

-23.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.61%

44.20%

-27.59%

BAR vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAR has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAR vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison

BAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GDXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%
GDXJ
VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF
2.69%2.33%2.61%0.72%0.51%1.78%1.58%0.39%0.45%0.03%4.78%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAR and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GDXJ has higher volatility (14.46%) compared to BAR (5.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAR dropped -26.32% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.

On 5-year performance, GDXJ leads with 18.66% vs 17.26% for BAR. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BAR has been the lower-risk option at 5.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GDXJ has performed better with a 18.66% return vs 17.26%. 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 0.52% for GDXJ.

GDXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 0.00% for BAR.

BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for BAR and 0.52% for GDXJ.

GDXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs 0.74), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BAR and GDXJ

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