FGDL vs. USCA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) and USCA (Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FGDL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while USCA is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Climate Action Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FGDL returned 31.32%/yr vs 20.69%/yr for USCA. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FGDL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for USCA.

Performance

FGDL vs. USCA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF (USCA). 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 lower than USCA's 7.05% return.

FGDL

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

USCA

• 1D: -0.81%
• 1M: 4.36%
• YTD: 7.05%
• 6M: 7.01%
• 1Y: 20.94%
• 3Y*: 20.69%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FGDL vs. USCA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	2.43%	64.15%	27.31%	1.88%
USCA Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF	7.05%	14.24%	27.24%	19.92%

Correlation

The correlation between FGDL and USCA is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2023	0.12

Return for Risk

FGDL vs. USCA — 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

USCA

USCA Risk / Return Rank: 48
USCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
USCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
USCA Omega Ratio Rank: 50
USCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
USCA Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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. USCA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF (USCA). 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	USCA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	1.74	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	2.42	-0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.31	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.66	2.05	-0.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.03	8.13	-4.10
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. USCA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGDL Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the USCA Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGDL and USCA, 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	USCA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.19	1.74	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.35	1.49	-0.14

Drawdowns

FGDL vs. USCA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGDL drawdown since its inception was -19.23%, roughly equal to the maximum USCA drawdown of -19.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGDL and USCA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGDL	USCA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.23%	-19.14%	-0.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.23%	-10.25%	-8.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.23%	-19.14%	-0.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.16%	-0.81%	-17.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.83%	-2.16%	-1.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.88%	2.58%	+5.30%

Volatility

FGDL vs. USCA - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) has a higher volatility of 5.61% compared to Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF (USCA) at 2.85%. This indicates that FGDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USCA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FGDL	USCA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.61%	2.85%	+2.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.18%	9.08%	+14.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.78%	12.08%	+14.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.03%	14.76%	+4.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.03%	14.76%	+4.27%

FGDL vs. USCA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGDL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than USCA's 0.07% 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

FGDL vs. USCA - Dividend Comparison

FGDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while USCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
USCA Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF	1.08%	1.14%	1.22%	1.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FGDL and USCA in my portfolio?

FGDL and USCA have a correlation of 0.19, 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 USCA?

FGDL has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to USCA (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FGDL dropped -19.23% vs USCA's -19.14%.

Which ETF is better, FGDL or USCA?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 31.32% vs 20.69% for USCA. On fees, USCA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, USCA has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FGDL or USCA?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 31.32% return vs 20.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FGDL or USCA?

USCA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FGDL.

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

USCA has the higher dividend yield at 1.08%, compared with 0.00% for FGDL.

What is the main difference between FGDL and USCA?

FGDL is categorized as Precious Metals, while USCA is Large Cap Blend Equities. FGDL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while USCA tracks MSCI USA Climate Action Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FGDL and 0.07% for USCA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USCA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 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.