GDOC vs. AAAU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GDOC (Goldman Sachs Future Health Care Equity ETF) and AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDOC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while AAAU is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. GDOC is actively managed, while AAAU is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GDOC returned 0.05%/yr vs 31.37%/yr for AAAU. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDOC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AAAU.

Performance

GDOC vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Future Health Care Equity ETF (GDOC) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDOC achieves a -7.76% return, which is significantly lower than AAAU's 2.94% return.

GDOC

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: 1.93%
• YTD: -7.76%
• 6M: -9.87%
• 1Y: 5.18%
• 3Y*: 0.05%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AAAU

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 2.94%
• 6M: 5.50%
• 1Y: 32.29%
• 3Y*: 31.37%
• 5Y*: 18.39%
• 10Y*: —

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

GDOC vs. AAAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GDOC Goldman Sachs Future Health Care Equity ETF	-7.76%	10.74%	-1.66%	4.60%	-17.12%	-2.77%
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	2.94%	64.06%	26.91%	12.96%	-0.50%	-1.86%

Correlation

The correlation between GDOC and AAAU is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2021	0.15

GDOC vs. AAAU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GDOC	AAAU
Healthcare	97.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	100.0%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GDOC vs. AAAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDOC

GDOC Risk / Return Rank: 13
GDOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
GDOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
GDOC Omega Ratio Rank: 13
GDOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
GDOC Martin Ratio Rank: 13

AAAU

AAAU Risk / Return Rank: 32
AAAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
AAAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
AAAU Omega Ratio Rank: 36
AAAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
AAAU Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

GDOC vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Future Health Care Equity ETF (GDOC) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). 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.

	GDOC	AAAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.33	1.23	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.60	1.63	-1.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.25	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.33	1.70	-1.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.76	4.21	-3.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GDOC vs. AAAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDOC Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the AAAU Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDOC and AAAU, 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

	GDOC	AAAU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33	1.23	-0.90
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.04	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.19	1.09	-1.28

Drawdowns

GDOC vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDOC drawdown since its inception was -31.01%, which is greater than AAAU's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDOC and AAAU.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDOC	AAAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.01%	-21.63%	-9.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.67%	-19.13%	+3.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.51%	-19.13%	-3.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.94%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.53%	-17.68%	+2.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.90%	-6.18%	-9.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.83%	7.69%	-0.86%

Volatility

GDOC vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Future Health Care Equity ETF (GDOC) is 4.90%, while Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that GDOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDOC	AAAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.90%	5.50%	-0.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.61%	22.94%	-11.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.64%	26.33%	-10.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.79%	17.83%	+0.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.79%	16.99%	+1.80%

GDOC vs. AAAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDOC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than AAAU's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDOC vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison

GDOC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, while AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GDOC Goldman Sachs Future Health Care Equity ETF	0.35%	0.32%	0.02%	0.55%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDOC and AAAU in my portfolio?

GDOC and AAAU have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDOC or AAAU?

AAAU has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to GDOC (4.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDOC dropped -31.01% vs AAAU's -21.63%.

Which ETF is better, GDOC or AAAU?

On 3-year performance, AAAU leads with 31.37% vs 0.05% for GDOC. On fees, AAAU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, GDOC has been the lower-risk option at 4.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDOC or AAAU?

Over the 3-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 31.37% return vs 0.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDOC or AAAU?

AAAU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GDOC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDOC or AAAU?

GDOC has the higher dividend yield at 0.35%, compared with 0.00% for AAAU.

What is the main difference between GDOC and AAAU?

GDOC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while AAAU is Precious Metals. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GDOC and 0.18% for AAAU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.23 vs 0.33), 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.