CEF.TO vs. GLTR

In the year-to-date period, CEF.TO achieves a 35.47% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's 21.47% return. Over the past 10 years, CEF.TO has outperformed GLTR with an annualized return of 10.11%, while GLTR has yielded a comparatively lower 6.02% annualized return.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF.TO) and Aberdeen Standard 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.

The current CEF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.63, which is lower than the GLTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEF.TO and GLTR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Neither CEF.TO nor GLTR has paid dividends to shareholders.

The maximum CEF.TO drawdown since its inception was -62.22%, which is greater than GLTR's maximum drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEF.TO and GLTR. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.

Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF.TO) has a higher volatility of 6.12% compared to Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) at 5.42%. This indicates that CEF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.