FLUD vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

FLUD (Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - FLUD is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. FLUD is actively managed, while GLDM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLUD returned 3.63%/yr vs 17.41%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLUD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

FLUD vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) 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, FLUD achieves a 1.52% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's -2.40% return.

FLUD

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.19%
• YTD: 1.52%
• 6M: 1.69%
• 1Y: 4.48%
• 3Y*: 5.27%
• 5Y*: 3.63%
• 10Y*: —

GLDM

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -9.52%
• YTD: -2.40%
• 6M: -2.09%
• 1Y: 22.58%
• 3Y*: 29.27%
• 5Y*: 17.41%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLUD vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FLUD Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.52%	5.36%	5.44%	5.95%	0.16%	0.09%	0.71%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	-2.40%	64.20%	27.08%	13.04%	-0.47%	-4.01%	4.87%

Correlation

The correlation between FLUD and GLDM is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.05
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2020	0.09

Return for Risk

FLUD vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLUD

FLUD Risk / Return Rank: 95
FLUD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FLUD Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
FLUD Omega Ratio Rank: 94
FLUD Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
FLUD Martin Ratio Rank: 97

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 27
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 31
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

FLUD vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) 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.

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.

	FLUD	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.78	0.90	+1.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.50	1.26	+3.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.19	+0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.53	1.00	+9.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	41.86	2.87	+38.99

FLUD vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLUD Sharpe Ratio is 2.78, which is higher than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 0.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLUD 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.

Drawdowns

FLUD vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLUD drawdown since its inception was -1.66%, smaller than the maximum GLDM drawdown of -24.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLUD and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLUD	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.66%	-24.35%	+22.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.44%	-24.35%	+23.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.59%	-24.35%	+23.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-1.66%	-24.35%	+22.69%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-21.96%	+21.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.24%	-6.27%	+6.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.11%	8.44%	-8.33%

Volatility

FLUD vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) is 0.38%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 7.73%. This indicates that FLUD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLUD	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.38%	7.73%	-7.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.78%	23.93%	-23.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.65%	27.15%	-25.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.34%	18.13%	-16.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.26%	16.98%	-15.72%

FLUD vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLUD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% 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

FLUD vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

FLUD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FLUD Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.27%	4.51%	4.97%	4.72%	1.39%	0.92%	0.93%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLUD and GLDM in my portfolio?

FLUD and GLDM have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLUD or GLDM?

GLDM has higher volatility (7.73%) compared to FLUD (0.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLUD dropped -1.66% vs GLDM's -24.35%.

Which ETF is better, FLUD or GLDM?

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 17.41% vs 3.63% for FLUD. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, FLUD has been the lower-risk option at 0.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLUD or GLDM?

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 17.41% return vs 3.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLUD or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FLUD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLUD or GLDM?

FLUD has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

What is the main difference between FLUD and GLDM?

FLUD is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while GLDM is Gold. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLUD and 0.10% for GLDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLUD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.78 vs 0.90), 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.