BAR vs. PLTM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) and PLTM (GraniteShares Platinum Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - BAR is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while PLTM is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Platinum London PM Fix ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAR returned 18.41%/yr vs 9.22%/yr for PLTM. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BAR charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PLTM.

Performance

BAR vs. PLTM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAR achieves a 2.94% return, which is significantly higher than PLTM's -9.33% return.

BAR

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -1.62%
• YTD: 2.94%
• 6M: 5.50%
• 1Y: 32.26%
• 3Y*: 31.38%
• 5Y*: 18.41%
• 10Y*: —

PLTM

• 1D: -3.82%
• 1M: -4.28%
• YTD: -9.33%
• 6M: 11.67%
• 1Y: 71.85%
• 3Y*: 22.22%
• 5Y*: 9.22%
• 10Y*: —

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

BAR vs. PLTM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	2.94%	64.12%	26.97%	12.96%	-0.55%	-3.92%	25.02%	18.16%	-4.39%
PLTM GraniteShares Platinum Trust	-9.33%	124.46%	-8.91%	-8.10%	10.83%	-10.52%	10.87%	20.76%	-20.48%

Correlation

The correlation between BAR and PLTM is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2018	0.52

The correlation between BAR and PLTM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BAR vs. PLTM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAR

BAR Risk / Return Rank: 32
BAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
BAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
BAR Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
BAR Martin Ratio Rank: 29

PLTM

PLTM Risk / Return Rank: 36
PLTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
PLTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
PLTM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
PLTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
PLTM Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

BAR vs. PLTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) and GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM). 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.

	BAR	PLTM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	1.41	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.62	1.80	-0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.26	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	2.09	-0.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.19	4.43	-0.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BAR vs. PLTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAR Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is comparable to the PLTM Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAR and PLTM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BAR	PLTM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	1.41	-0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.03	0.28	+0.75
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.90	0.24	+0.66

Drawdowns

BAR vs. PLTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAR drawdown since its inception was -21.53%, smaller than the maximum PLTM drawdown of -42.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAR and PLTM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAR	PLTM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.53%	-42.32%	+20.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.19%	-34.52%	+15.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.19%	-34.52%	+15.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.91%	-34.52%	+13.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.72%	-33.02%	+15.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.45%	-18.55%	+12.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.72%	16.28%	-8.56%

Volatility

BAR vs. PLTM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) is 5.46%, while GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM) has a volatility of 10.88%. This indicates that BAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PLTM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAR	PLTM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	10.88%	-5.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.03%	45.45%	-22.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.43%	51.40%	-24.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.90%	32.83%	-14.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.38%	30.98%	-14.60%

BAR vs. PLTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAR has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than PLTM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAR vs. PLTM - Dividend Comparison

Neither BAR nor PLTM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAR and PLTM in my portfolio?

BAR and PLTM have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAR or PLTM?

PLTM has higher volatility (10.88%) compared to BAR (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAR dropped -21.53% vs PLTM's -42.32%.

Which ETF is better, BAR or PLTM?

On 5-year performance, BAR leads with 18.41% vs 9.22% for PLTM. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BAR has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAR or PLTM?

Over the 5-year period, BAR has performed better with a 18.41% return vs 9.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAR or PLTM?

BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PLTM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAR or PLTM?

BAR and PLTM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BAR and PLTM?

BAR is categorized as Gold, while PLTM is Precious Metals. BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while PLTM tracks Platinum London PM Fix ($/ozt). Their fees differ too: 0.17% for BAR and 0.50% for PLTM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PLTM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 1.23), 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.