PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GC=F vs. PHYS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

GC=F vs. PHYS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gold (GC=F) and Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

GC=F vs. PHYS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GC=F
Gold
8.72%64.52%27.48%13.34%-0.43%-3.47%24.59%18.87%-2.14%13.59%
PHYS
Sprott Physical Gold Trust
7.18%63.95%26.43%12.98%-1.81%-4.84%23.89%18.14%-2.64%12.78%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GC=F achieves a 8.72% return, which is significantly higher than PHYS's 7.18% return. Over the past 10 years, GC=F has outperformed PHYS with an annualized return of 14.46%, while PHYS has yielded a comparatively lower 13.49% annualized return.


GC=F

1D
-1.68%
1M
-7.92%
YTD
8.72%
6M
22.48%
1Y
49.77%
3Y*
33.33%
5Y*
22.19%
10Y*
14.46%

PHYS

1D
-1.97%
1M
-8.84%
YTD
7.18%
6M
19.48%
1Y
46.30%
3Y*
31.43%
5Y*
21.13%
10Y*
13.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

GC=F vs. PHYS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GC=F
GC=F Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
GC=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GC=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GC=F Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
GC=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
GC=F Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

PHYS
PHYS Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
PHYS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PHYS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
PHYS Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
PHYS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
PHYS Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GC=F vs. PHYS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gold (GC=F) and Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS). 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.


GC=FPHYSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.72

1.62

+0.10

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.13

2.01

+0.13

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.30

+0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.64

2.41

+0.23

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.67

8.56

+1.11

GC=F vs. PHYS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GC=F Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is comparable to the PHYS Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GC=F and PHYS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GC=FPHYSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.72

1.62

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.23

1.18

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

0.83

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.64

0.47

+0.17

Correlation

The correlation between GC=F and PHYS is 0.81, 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.


Drawdowns

GC=F vs. PHYS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GC=F drawdown since its inception was -44.36%, smaller than the maximum PHYS drawdown of -48.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GC=F and PHYS.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


GC=FPHYSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.36%

-48.16%

+3.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.73%

-19.35%

+1.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.43%

-21.80%

+1.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.87%

-23.75%

+2.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.58%

-13.54%

+1.96%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.03%

-21.07%

+8.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.83%

5.44%

-0.61%

Volatility

GC=F vs. PHYS - Volatility Comparison

Gold (GC=F) has a higher volatility of 11.34% compared to Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS) at 10.79%. This indicates that GC=F's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PHYS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


GC=FPHYSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.34%

10.79%

+0.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.65%

25.29%

-0.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.83%

28.67%

-0.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.97%

18.05%

-0.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.37%

16.27%

+0.10%