FIJDX vs. FGDL

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z (FIJDX) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL).

FIJDX is an actively managed fund by Fidelity. It was launched on Dec 16, 1985. FGDL is a passively managed fund by Franklin Templeton that tracks the performance of the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). It was launched on Jun 30, 2022.

Performance

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z (FIJDX) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FIJDX Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z	9.12%	143.25%	15.10%	-0.26%	5.05%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	10.02%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.91%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FIJDX achieves a 9.12% return, which is significantly lower than FGDL's 10.02% return.

FIJDX

• 1D: 7.17%
• 1M: -20.07%
• YTD: 9.12%
• 6M: 21.75%
• 1Y: 98.08%
• 3Y*: 39.77%
• 5Y*: 21.13%
• 10Y*: —

FGDL

• 1D: 1.93%
• 1M: -10.91%
• YTD: 10.02%
• 6M: 22.55%
• 1Y: 52.44%
• 3Y*: 33.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FIJDX has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than FGDL's 0.15% expense ratio.

FIJDX

Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z

FGDL

Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF

Return for Risk

FIJDX vs. FGDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FIJDX

FIJDX Risk / Return Rank: 91
FIJDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
FIJDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FIJDX Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FIJDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FIJDX Martin Ratio Rank: 93

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 84
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z (FIJDX) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). 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.

	FIJDX	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	1.88	+0.40
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.50	2.29	+0.21
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.34	+0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.33	2.68	+0.65
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.35	9.56	+2.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FIJDX Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the FGDL Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FIJDX and FGDL, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FIJDX	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.28	1.88	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.63	1.55	-0.92

Correlation

The correlation between FIJDX and FGDL is 0.77, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Dividend Comparison

FIJDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.99%, while FGDL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FIJDX Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z	1.99%	2.17%	3.63%	1.16%	0.38%	1.71%	4.54%	0.53%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FIJDX drawdown since its inception was -50.43%, which is greater than FGDL's maximum drawdown of -19.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FIJDX and FGDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FIJDX	FGDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.43%	-19.23%	-31.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.85%	-19.23%	-10.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.09%	-12.10%	-7.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.44%	-3.35%	-15.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.04%	5.39%	+2.65%

Volatility

FIJDX vs. FGDL - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Advisor Gold Fund Class Z (FIJDX) has a higher volatility of 17.48% compared to Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) at 10.10%. This indicates that FIJDX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FGDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FIJDX	FGDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.48%	10.10%	+7.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.67%	24.42%	+11.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.18%	28.02%	+15.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.88%	18.97%	+13.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.04%	18.97%	+15.07%