CEF vs. FGADX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEF (Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust) and FGADX (Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund Advisor Class) are both Precious Metals funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEF returned 13.80%/yr vs 16.24%/yr for FGADX. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CEF charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for FGADX.

Performance

CEF vs. FGADX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) and Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund Advisor Class (FGADX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEF achieves a 1.16% return, which is significantly lower than FGADX's 6.92% return. Over the past 10 years, CEF has underperformed FGADX with an annualized return of 13.80%, while FGADX has yielded a comparatively higher 16.24% annualized return.

CEF

• 1D: -1.74%
• 1M: -0.92%
• YTD: 1.16%
• 6M: 10.23%
• 1Y: 54.90%
• 3Y*: 35.48%
• 5Y*: 18.30%
• 10Y*: 13.80%

FGADX

• 1D: 1.16%
• 1M: 2.22%
• YTD: 6.92%
• 6M: 19.14%
• 1Y: 85.86%
• 3Y*: 54.16%
• 5Y*: 22.03%
• 10Y*: 16.24%

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

CEF vs. FGADX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust	1.16%	92.76%	24.07%	6.80%	1.07%	-8.32%	31.99%	16.91%	-6.34%	18.78%
FGADX Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund Advisor Class	6.92%	197.29%	17.98%	2.20%	-23.24%	-3.76%	44.60%	51.87%	-17.89%	0.06%

Correlation

The correlation between CEF and FGADX is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 1997	0.63

The correlation between CEF and FGADX shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (all time) to 0.80 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CEF vs. FGADX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEF

CEF Risk / Return Rank: 25
CEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
CEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
CEF Omega Ratio Rank: 29
CEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CEF Martin Ratio Rank: 20

FGADX

FGADX Risk / Return Rank: 43
FGADX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
FGADX Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FGADX Omega Ratio Rank: 41
FGADX Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FGADX Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

CEF vs. FGADX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) and Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund Advisor Class (FGADX). 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.

	CEF	FGADX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	2.10	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	2.41	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.34	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	2.83	-0.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.26	7.96	-2.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CEF vs. FGADX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEF Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the FGADX Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEF and FGADX, 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

	CEF	FGADX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	2.10	-0.64
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76	0.66	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	0.50	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.22	0.27	-0.04

Drawdowns

CEF vs. FGADX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEF drawdown since its inception was -62.29%, smaller than the maximum FGADX drawdown of -78.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEF and FGADX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEF	FGADX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.29%	-78.57%	+16.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.77%	-31.15%	+4.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.77%	-31.15%	+4.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.77%	-48.77%	+22.00%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-29.10%	-49.27%	+20.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.75%	-20.57%	-1.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.34%	-34.71%	+7.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.47%	11.06%	-0.59%

Volatility

CEF vs. FGADX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) is 10.09%, while Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund Advisor Class (FGADX) has a volatility of 13.61%. This indicates that CEF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FGADX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CEF	FGADX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.09%	13.61%	-3.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.14%	35.14%	0.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.84%	42.21%	-4.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.26%	33.69%	-9.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.82%	32.77%	-10.95%

CEF vs. FGADX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than FGADX's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEF vs. FGADX - Dividend Comparison

CEF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FGADX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.18%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.08%	0.07%	0.09%	0.10%
FGADX Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund Advisor Class	9.18%	9.81%	12.51%	3.09%	0.00%	8.83%	10.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.62%	8.38%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEF and FGADX in my portfolio?

CEF and FGADX have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CEF or FGADX?

FGADX has higher volatility (13.61%) compared to CEF (10.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEF dropped -62.29% vs FGADX's -78.57%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FGADX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.46), 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.