EMVL.L vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

EMVL.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - EMVL.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMVL.L returned 15.37%/yr vs 17.89%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMVL.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) 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, EMVL.L achieves a 37.33% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's 0.30% return.

EMVL.L

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 2.44%
• YTD: 37.33%
• 6M: 41.13%
• 1Y: 75.61%
• 3Y*: 34.59%
• 5Y*: 15.37%
• 10Y*: —

GLDM

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -8.41%
• YTD: 0.30%
• 6M: 3.19%
• 1Y: 30.55%
• 3Y*: 30.08%
• 5Y*: 17.89%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EMVL.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)	37.33%	43.13%	14.49%	18.37%	-16.29%	5.29%	7.72%	17.64%	-2.10%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.30%	64.20%	27.08%	13.04%	-0.47%	-4.01%	25.10%	18.10%	3.55%

Correlation

The correlation between EMVL.L and GLDM is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.29
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2018	0.20

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMVL.L	GLDM
Technology	44.7%	-
Financial Services	13.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.5%	-
Basic Materials	10.0%	100.0%
Energy	8.1%	-
Industrials	2.7%	-
Communication Services	2.5%	-
Real Estate	1.8%	-
Healthcare	1.7%	-
Utilities	1.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.1%	-

Return for Risk

EMVL.L vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMVL.L

EMVL.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
EMVL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
EMVL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 93
EMVL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EMVL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 92

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 34
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) 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.

	EMVL.L	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.50	1.15	+2.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.17	1.54	+2.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.23	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.45	1.53	+4.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.70	3.85	+17.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.50, which is higher than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMVL.L 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMVL.L	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.50	1.15	+2.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76	1.00	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.73	0.99	-0.26

Drawdowns

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMVL.L drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMVL.L and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMVL.L	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.95%	-21.63%	-13.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.65%	-20.00%	+8.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.42%	-20.00%	+3.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.20%	-20.92%	-13.28%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.53%	-19.80%	+11.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.54%	-6.24%	-3.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.47%	7.96%	-4.49%

Volatility

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) has a higher volatility of 11.12% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 5.65%. This indicates that EMVL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMVL.L	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.12%	5.65%	+5.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.39%	23.31%	-4.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.51%	26.65%	-5.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.13%	17.98%	+2.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.15%	16.89%	+4.26%

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMVL.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMVL.L vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

Neither EMVL.L nor GLDM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMVL.L and GLDM in my portfolio?

EMVL.L and GLDM have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMVL.L or GLDM?

On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMVL.L or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EMVL.L.

What is the main difference between EMVL.L and GLDM?

EMVL.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while GLDM is Gold. EMVL.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for EMVL.L and 0.10% for GLDM.