CUT vs. SGDM
CUT (Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF) and SGDM (Sprott Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CUT is a Materials fund tracking the Beacon Global Timber Index, while SGDM is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Gold Miners Custom Factors Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUT returned 4.57%/yr vs 10.86%/yr for SGDM. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CUT charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for SGDM.
Performance
CUT vs. SGDM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CUT achieves a -5.45% return, which is significantly higher than SGDM's -7.50% return. Over the past 10 years, CUT has underperformed SGDM with an annualized return of 4.57%, while SGDM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.86% annualized return.
CUT
- 1D
- -1.14%
- 1M
- 1.85%
- YTD
- -5.45%
- 6M
- -4.37%
- 1Y
- -6.01%
- 3Y*
- 1.17%
- 5Y*
- -3.62%
- 10Y*
- 4.57%
SGDM
- 1D
- -4.19%
- 1M
- -8.59%
- YTD
- -7.50%
- 6M
- -12.62%
- 1Y
- 41.50%
- 3Y*
- 37.68%
- 5Y*
- 18.99%
- 10Y*
- 10.86%
CUT vs. SGDM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | -5.45% | -5.92% | 1.82% | 8.65% | -16.38% | 12.29% | 18.05% | 23.35% | -21.70% | 30.41% |
SGDM Sprott Gold Miners ETF | -7.50% | 153.46% | 12.14% | 2.34% | -8.23% | -9.15% | 21.85% | 44.27% | -15.14% | 10.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between CUT and SGDM is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2014 | 0.21 |
The correlation between CUT and SGDM shifts across timeframes, from 0.21 (all time) to 0.33 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CUT vs. SGDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CUT
SGDM
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
CUT
SGDM
Consumer Cyclical
CUT
SGDM
-
Industrials
CUT
SGDM
-
Real Estate
CUT
SGDM
-
Financial Services
CUT
SGDM
Consumer Defensive
CUT
SGDM
-
Technology
CUT
SGDM
-
Communication Services
CUT
-
SGDM
-
Energy
CUT
-
SGDM
-
Healthcare
CUT
-
SGDM
-
Utilities
CUT
-
SGDM
-
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
CUT vs. SGDM — Risk / Return Rank
CUT
SGDM
CUT vs. SGDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) and Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM). 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.
| CUT | SGDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.18 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.31 | 1.16 | -1.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.63 | 3.06 | -3.69 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CUT vs. SGDM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CUT drawdown since its inception was -70.03%, which is greater than SGDM's maximum drawdown of -54.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUT and SGDM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CUT | SGDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.03% | -54.95% | -15.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.62% | -35.96% | +16.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.23% | -35.96% | +13.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.40% | -45.06% | +14.66% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.76% | -49.69% | +3.93% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.89% | -32.43% | +9.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.28% | -25.47% | +10.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.55% | 13.61% | -4.06% |
Volatility
CUT vs. SGDM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) is 5.08%, while Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM) has a volatility of 16.88%. This indicates that CUT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CUT | SGDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.08% | 16.88% | -11.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.26% | 39.44% | -25.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.86% | 46.95% | -28.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.52% | 36.24% | -17.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.12% | 37.02% | -16.90% |
CUT vs. SGDM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CUT has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than SGDM's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CUT vs. SGDM - Dividend Comparison
CUT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, more than SGDM's 1.13% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | 2.60% | 2.46% | 3.05% | 2.44% | 2.58% | 1.57% | 1.65% | 2.67% | 3.43% | 1.57% | 2.08% | 1.52% |
SGDM Sprott Gold Miners ETF | 1.13% | 1.04% | 1.04% | 1.39% | 1.42% | 1.33% | 0.30% | 0.25% | 0.50% | 0.58% | 0.02% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CUT and SGDM have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SGDM has higher volatility (16.88%) compared to CUT (5.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CUT dropped -70.03% vs SGDM's -54.95%.
On 10-year performance, SGDM leads with 10.86% vs 4.57% for CUT. On fees, SGDM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CUT has been the lower-risk option at 5.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SGDM has performed better with a 10.86% return vs 4.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SGDM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.
CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 1.13% for SGDM.
CUT is categorized as Materials, while SGDM is Gold. CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index, while SGDM tracks Solactive Gold Miners Custom Factors Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CUT and 0.50% for SGDM.
SGDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.89 vs -0.32), 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 CUT and SGDM
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