PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CRBN vs. GLDM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CRBN vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF (CRBN) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CRBN achieves a 11.84% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's 3.99% return.


CRBN

1D
0.54%
1M
5.38%
YTD
11.84%
6M
13.43%
1Y
29.02%
3Y*
21.52%
5Y*
11.46%
10Y*
12.88%

GLDM

1D
0.15%
1M
-2.66%
YTD
3.99%
6M
6.55%
1Y
32.55%
3Y*
31.91%
5Y*
18.99%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CRBN vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
CRBN
iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF
11.84%21.85%19.29%22.31%-19.12%18.82%16.83%28.65%-9.42%
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
3.99%64.20%27.08%13.04%-0.47%-4.01%25.10%18.10%1.84%

Correlation

The correlation between CRBN and GLDM is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.23

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2018

0.14

The correlation between CRBN and GLDM shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CRBN vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CRBN
GLDM

Technology

32.3%

-

Financial Services

18.3%

-

Communication Services

9.6%

-

Industrials

9.4%

-

Healthcare

8.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

7.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.4%

-

Real Estate

2.9%

-

Basic Materials

2.5%
100.0%

Energy

2.2%

-

Utilities

2.2%

-

Technology

CRBN
32.3%
GLDM

-

Financial Services

CRBN
18.3%
GLDM

-

Communication Services

CRBN
9.6%
GLDM

-

Industrials

CRBN
9.4%
GLDM

-

Healthcare

CRBN
8.1%
GLDM

-

Consumer Cyclical

CRBN
7.7%
GLDM

-

Consumer Defensive

CRBN
4.4%
GLDM

-

Real Estate

CRBN
2.9%
GLDM

-

Basic Materials

CRBN
2.5%
GLDM
100.0%

Energy

CRBN
2.2%
GLDM

-

Utilities

CRBN
2.2%
GLDM

-

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

CRBN vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRBN
CRBN Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
CRBN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CRBN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
CRBN Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
CRBN Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
CRBN Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

GLDM
GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CRBN vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF (CRBN) 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.


CRBNGLDMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.24

1.24

+1.00

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.09

1.64

+1.45

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.25

+0.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.96

1.88

+1.08

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.13

4.74

+8.39

CRBN vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRBN Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is higher than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRBN 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CRBNGLDMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.24

1.24

+1.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

1.07

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.70

1.03

-0.33

Drawdowns

CRBN vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRBN drawdown since its inception was -33.13%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRBN and GLDM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CRBNGLDMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.13%

-21.63%

-11.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.08%

-19.14%

+9.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.60%

-19.14%

+2.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.04%

-20.92%

-6.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-16.85%

+16.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.21%

-6.21%

+1.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.28%

7.61%

-5.33%

Volatility

CRBN vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF (CRBN) is 3.61%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 5.74%. This indicates that CRBN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CRBNGLDMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.61%

5.74%

-2.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.50%

22.98%

-12.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.03%

26.49%

-13.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.09%

17.92%

-1.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.90%

16.85%

+0.05%

CRBN vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRBN has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

CRBN vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

CRBN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CRBN
iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF
1.97%2.21%1.94%2.01%1.95%1.57%1.41%2.27%2.51%2.05%2.27%2.01%
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


CRBN and GLDM have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GLDM has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to CRBN (3.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRBN dropped -33.13% vs GLDM's -21.63%.

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 18.99% vs 11.46% for CRBN. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, CRBN has been the lower-risk option at 3.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 18.99% return vs 11.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CRBN.

CRBN has the higher dividend yield at 1.97%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

CRBN is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while GLDM is Gold. CRBN tracks MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target Index, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CRBN and 0.10% for GLDM.

CRBN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.24), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CRBN and GLDM

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