COST vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

COST (Costco Wholesale Corporation) is a stock, while GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Over the past 5 years, COST returned 22.12%/yr vs 17.41%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

COST vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COST achieves a 14.24% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's -2.40% return.

COST

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -6.35%
• YTD: 14.24%
• 6M: 11.38%
• 1Y: -0.24%
• 3Y*: 25.12%
• 5Y*: 22.12%
• 10Y*: 22.27%

GLDM

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -7.40%
• YTD: -2.40%
• 6M: -2.09%
• 1Y: 22.58%
• 3Y*: 29.27%
• 5Y*: 17.41%
• 10Y*: —

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

COST vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation	14.24%	-5.39%	39.62%	49.00%	-19.05%	51.82%	32.67%	45.70%	-3.33%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	-2.40%	64.20%	27.08%	13.04%	-0.47%	-4.01%	25.10%	18.10%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between COST and GLDM is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.04
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2018	0.05

Return for Risk

COST vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

COST

COST Risk / Return Rank: 37
COST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
COST Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
COST Omega Ratio Rank: 32
COST Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
COST Martin Ratio Rank: 39

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 27
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 31
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

COST vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). 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.

	COST	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.08	0.90	-0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.02	1.26	-1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.19	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.10	1.00	-1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.22	2.87	-3.09

COST vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COST Sharpe Ratio is -0.08, which is lower than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 0.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COST and GLDM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

COST vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COST drawdown since its inception was -53.39%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -24.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COST and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	COST	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.39%	-24.35%	-29.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.14%	-24.35%	+9.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.74%	-24.35%	+3.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.40%	-24.35%	-7.05%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.40%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.23%	-21.96%	+11.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.36%	-6.27%	-7.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.67%	8.44%	-1.77%

Volatility

COST vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) have volatilities of 7.44% and 7.73%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COST	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.44%	7.73%	-0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.53%	23.93%	-9.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.80%	27.15%	-8.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.72%	18.13%	+4.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.95%	16.98%	+4.97%

Dividends

COST vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation	0.55%	0.59%	0.49%	2.87%	0.76%	0.54%	3.38%	0.86%	1.08%	4.81%	1.09%	4.06%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COST and GLDM in my portfolio?

COST and GLDM have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COST or GLDM?

GLDM has higher volatility (7.73%) compared to COST (7.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COST dropped -53.39% vs GLDM's -24.35%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.90 vs -0.08), 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.