FGDL vs. ACLO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) and ACLO (TCW AAA CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FGDL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while ACLO is a CLO fund actively managed by TCW. FGDL is passively managed, while ACLO is actively managed. Over the past year, FGDL returned 31.70% vs 5.31% for ACLO. At a correlation of -0.15, they often move in opposite directions. FGDL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACLO.

Performance

FGDL vs. ACLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FGDL achieves a 2.43% return, which is significantly higher than ACLO's 2.21% return.

FGDL

• 1D: -1.09%
• 1M: -1.94%
• YTD: 2.43%
• 6M: 4.89%
• 1Y: 31.70%
• 3Y*: 31.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACLO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.42%
• YTD: 2.21%
• 6M: 2.58%
• 1Y: 5.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FGDL vs. ACLO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	2.43%	64.15%	0.57%
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF	2.21%	5.32%	0.81%

Correlation

The correlation between FGDL and ACLO is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024	-0.15

Return for Risk

FGDL vs. ACLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 31
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 28

ACLO

ACLO Risk / Return Rank: 99
ACLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

FGDL vs. ACLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO). 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.

	FGDL	ACLO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	7.29	-6.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	14.85	-13.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	3.41	-2.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.66	19.90	-18.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.03	164.37	-160.34
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FGDL vs. ACLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGDL Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the ACLO Sharpe Ratio of 7.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGDL and ACLO, 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

	FGDL	ACLO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.19	7.29	-6.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.35	5.10	-3.75

Drawdowns

FGDL vs. ACLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGDL drawdown since its inception was -19.23%, which is greater than ACLO's maximum drawdown of -1.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGDL and ACLO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGDL	ACLO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.23%	-1.01%	-18.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.23%	-0.27%	-18.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.16%	0.00%	-18.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.83%	-0.05%	-3.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.88%	0.03%	+7.85%

Volatility

FGDL vs. ACLO - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) has a higher volatility of 5.61% compared to TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) at 0.14%. This indicates that FGDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FGDL	ACLO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.61%	0.14%	+5.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.18%	0.57%	+22.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.78%	0.73%	+26.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.03%	1.08%	+17.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.03%	1.08%	+17.95%

FGDL vs. ACLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGDL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ACLO's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FGDL vs. ACLO - Dividend Comparison

FGDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.91%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF	4.91%	4.87%	0.59%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FGDL and ACLO in my portfolio?

FGDL and ACLO have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FGDL or ACLO?

FGDL has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to ACLO (0.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FGDL dropped -19.23% vs ACLO's -1.01%.

Which ETF is better, FGDL or ACLO?

On 1-year performance, FGDL leads with 31.70% vs 5.31% for ACLO. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, ACLO has been the lower-risk option at 0.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FGDL or ACLO?

Over the 1-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 31.70% return vs 5.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FGDL or ACLO?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for ACLO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FGDL or ACLO?

ACLO has the higher dividend yield at 4.91%, compared with 0.00% for FGDL.

What is the main difference between FGDL and ACLO?

FGDL is categorized as Precious Metals, while ACLO is CLO. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FGDL and 0.20% for ACLO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.29 vs 1.19), 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.