COST vs. IAU
COST (Costco Wholesale Corporation) is a stock, while IAU (iShares Gold Trust) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Over the past 10 years, COST returned 22.25%/yr vs 12.71%/yr for IAU. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
COST vs. IAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COST achieves a 13.35% return, which is significantly higher than IAU's 0.26% return. Over the past 10 years, COST has outperformed IAU with an annualized return of 22.25%, while IAU has yielded a comparatively lower 12.71% annualized return.
COST
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- -3.37%
- YTD
- 13.35%
- 6M
- 10.14%
- 1Y
- -3.42%
- 3Y*
- 25.18%
- 5Y*
- 22.05%
- 10Y*
- 22.25%
IAU
- 1D
- 0.20%
- 1M
- -8.43%
- YTD
- 0.26%
- 6M
- 3.08%
- 1Y
- 30.27%
- 3Y*
- 29.88%
- 5Y*
- 17.71%
- 10Y*
- 12.71%
COST vs. IAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation | 13.35% | -5.39% | 39.62% | 49.00% | -19.05% | 51.82% | 32.67% | 45.70% | 10.60% | 22.37% |
IAU iShares Gold Trust | 0.26% | 63.95% | 26.85% | 12.84% | -0.63% | -4.00% | 25.03% | 17.98% | -1.76% | 12.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between COST and IAU is -0.01, 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 | -0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2005 | 0.00 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
COST vs. IAU — Risk / Return Rank
COST
IAU
COST vs. IAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). 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.
| COST | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.23 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.22 | 1.52 | -1.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.51 | 3.80 | -4.31 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| COST | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.18 | 1.14 | -1.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 | 0.99 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 1.02 | 0.80 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 0.61 | -0.03 |
Drawdowns
COST vs. IAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COST drawdown since its inception was -53.39%, which is greater than IAU's maximum drawdown of -45.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COST and IAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COST | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.39% | -45.14% | -8.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.38% | -20.04% | +4.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.74% | -20.04% | -0.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.40% | -20.93% | -10.47% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.40% | -21.82% | -9.58% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.93% | -19.88% | +8.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -15.97% | +2.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.15% | 7.99% | -0.84% |
Volatility
COST vs. IAU - Volatility Comparison
Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) has a higher volatility of 7.71% compared to iShares Gold Trust (IAU) at 5.64%. This indicates that COST's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COST | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.71% | 5.64% | +2.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.53% | 23.33% | -8.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.79% | 26.68% | -7.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.71% | 18.02% | +4.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.95% | 15.94% | +6.01% |
Dividends
COST vs. IAU - Dividend Comparison
COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, while IAU 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% |
IAU iShares Gold 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
COST and IAU have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COST has higher volatility (7.71%) compared to IAU (5.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COST dropped -53.39% vs IAU's -45.14%.
IAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.14 vs -0.18), 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.
Find the right allocation for COST and IAU
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer