CIND.L vs. GLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CIND.L (iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc) and GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - CIND.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, while GLD is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CIND.L returned 12.77%/yr vs 13.12%/yr for GLD. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. CIND.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GLD.

Performance

CIND.L vs. GLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIND.L achieves a 5.75% return, which is significantly higher than GLD's 2.92% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CIND.L having a 12.77% annualized return and GLD not far ahead at 13.12%.

CIND.L

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: 2.56%
• YTD: 5.75%
• 6M: 7.17%
• 1Y: 21.24%
• 3Y*: 16.20%
• 5Y*: 9.37%
• 10Y*: 12.77%

GLD

• 1D: -0.99%
• 1M: -1.65%
• YTD: 2.92%
• 6M: 5.43%
• 1Y: 32.04%
• 3Y*: 31.09%
• 5Y*: 18.15%
• 10Y*: 13.12%

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

CIND.L vs. GLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CIND.L iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc	5.75%	14.46%	14.71%	15.66%	-7.56%	20.97%	8.76%	24.22%	-4.90%	27.62%
GLD SPDR Gold Shares	2.92%	63.68%	26.66%	12.69%	-0.77%	-4.15%	24.81%	17.86%	-1.94%	12.81%

Correlation

The correlation between CIND.L and GLD is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.09
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.08
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 28, 2012	-0.03

The correlation between CIND.L and GLD shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (all time) to 0.14 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CIND.L vs. GLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CIND.L	GLD
Financial Services	27.4%	-
Technology	18.2%	-
Industrials	18.0%	-
Healthcare	13.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	-
Basic Materials	3.8%	100.0%
Energy	2.3%	-
Communication Services	1.8%	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CIND.L vs. GLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

CIND.L

CIND.L Risk / Return Rank: 51
CIND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
CIND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
CIND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 50
CIND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
CIND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 49

GLD

GLD Risk / Return Rank: 32
GLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
GLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
GLD Omega Ratio Rank: 35
GLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
GLD Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

CIND.L vs. GLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). 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.

	CIND.L	GLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	1.21	+0.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	1.60	+1.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.24	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.24	1.68	+0.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.13	4.15	+3.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CIND.L vs. GLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIND.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is higher than the GLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIND.L and GLD, 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

	CIND.L	GLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.75	1.21	+0.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	1.01	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.80	0.83	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	0.60	+0.23

Drawdowns

CIND.L vs. GLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIND.L drawdown since its inception was -36.68%, smaller than the maximum GLD drawdown of -45.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIND.L and GLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CIND.L	GLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.68%	-45.56%	+8.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.44%	-19.21%	+9.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.44%	-19.21%	+2.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.90%	-21.03%	+1.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.68%	-22.00%	-14.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.61%	-17.75%	+17.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.67%	-16.16%	+12.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.61%	7.73%	-5.12%

Volatility

CIND.L vs. GLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) is 3.18%, while SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) has a volatility of 5.51%. This indicates that CIND.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CIND.L	GLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.18%	5.51%	-2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.08%	23.16%	-14.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.13%	26.61%	-14.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.37%	18.00%	-3.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.98%	15.95%	+0.03%

CIND.L vs. GLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIND.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than GLD's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

CIND.L vs. GLD - Dividend Comparison

Neither CIND.L nor GLD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CIND.L and GLD in my portfolio?

CIND.L and GLD have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CIND.L or GLD?

On fees, CIND.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CIND.L or GLD?

CIND.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GLD.

What is the main difference between CIND.L and GLD?

CIND.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GLD is Gold. CIND.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while GLD tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CIND.L and 0.40% for GLD.