BAR vs. GLTR
BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) and GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAR is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAR returned 19.04%/yr vs 15.57%/yr for GLTR. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. BAR charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.
Performance
BAR vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BAR achieves a -1.60% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's -6.71% return.
BAR
- 1D
- 4.13%
- 1M
- 1.98%
- 6M
- -14.09%
- YTD
- -1.60%
- 1Y
- 25.44%
- 3Y*
- 29.62%
- 5Y*
- 19.04%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.85%
GLTR
- 1D
- 3.97%
- 1M
- 1.66%
- 6M
- -20.31%
- YTD
- -6.71%
- 1Y
- 34.83%
- 3Y*
- 29.44%
- 5Y*
- 15.57%
- 10Y*
- 10.90%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.06%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $8.20M | $7.35M | $9.57M | |
| $15.91M | $12.81M | $13.67M |
BAR vs. GLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | -1.60% | 64.12% | 26.97% | 12.96% | -0.55% | -3.92% | 25.02% | 18.16% | -1.87% | -0.79% |
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF | -6.71% | 87.25% | 20.63% | 2.01% | -0.25% | -9.60% | 29.52% | 20.96% | -2.85% | -0.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAR and GLTR is 0.92, 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. | 0.92 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.92 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2017 | 0.89 |
The correlation between BAR and GLTR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - 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. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank
BAR
GLTR
BAR vs. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) 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.
| BAR | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.03 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.19 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.97 | 0.92 | +0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.05 | 1.82 | +0.24 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BAR vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAR drawdown since its inception was -26.32%, smaller than the maximum GLTR drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAR and GLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAR | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.32% | -55.70% | +29.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.32% | -37.87% | +11.55% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.32% | -37.87% | +11.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.32% | -37.87% | +11.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -37.87% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -21.35% | -32.75% | +11.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.77% | -28.88% | +22.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.42% | 19.21% | -6.79% |
Volatility
BAR vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) is 7.09%, while abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) has a volatility of 8.43%. This indicates that BAR 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAR | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.09% | 8.43% | -1.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.88% | 27.73% | -7.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.13% | 39.70% | -11.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.47% | 24.26% | -5.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.66% | 20.84% | -4.18% |
BAR vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAR has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
BAR vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison
Neither BAR nor GLTR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, BAR and GLTR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
GLTR has higher volatility (8.43%) compared to BAR (7.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAR dropped -26.32% vs GLTR's -55.70%.
On 5-year performance, BAR leads with 19.04% vs 15.57% for GLTR. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BAR has been the lower-risk option at 7.09%. 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 19.04% return vs 15.57%. 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 0.60% for GLTR.
BAR and GLTR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BAR is categorized as Gold, while GLTR is Precious Metals. BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for BAR and 0.60% for GLTR.
BAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.91 vs 0.88), 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 GLTR
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