GLD vs. CMS
GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM, while CMS (CMS Energy Corporation) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, GLD returned 12.15%/yr vs 8.55%/yr for CMS. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
GLD vs. CMS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLD achieves a -2.47% return, which is significantly lower than CMS's 6.82% return. Over the past 10 years, GLD has outperformed CMS with an annualized return of 12.15%, while CMS has yielded a comparatively lower 8.55% annualized return.
GLD
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- -7.37%
- YTD
- -2.47%
- 6M
- -2.25%
- 1Y
- 22.21%
- 3Y*
- 28.89%
- 5Y*
- 17.08%
- 10Y*
- 12.15%
CMS
- 1D
- 0.99%
- 1M
- 2.69%
- YTD
- 6.82%
- 6M
- 6.95%
- 1Y
- 7.49%
- 3Y*
- 10.50%
- 5Y*
- 7.32%
- 10Y*
- 8.55%
GLD vs. CMS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLD SPDR Gold Shares | -2.47% | 63.68% | 26.66% | 12.69% | -0.77% | -4.15% | 24.81% | 17.86% | -1.94% | 12.81% |
CMS CMS Energy Corporation | 6.82% | 8.13% | 18.60% | -5.21% | 0.84% | 9.71% | -0.32% | 30.04% | 8.25% | 17.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLD and CMS is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2004 | 0.10 |
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
GLD vs. CMS — Risk / Return Rank
GLD
CMS
GLD vs. CMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and CMS Energy Corporation (CMS). 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.
| GLD | CMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.08 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.98 | 0.62 | +0.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.81 | 1.61 | +1.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLD vs. CMS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLD drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, smaller than the maximum CMS drawdown of -91.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLD and CMS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLD | CMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.56% | -91.20% | +45.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.46% | -11.48% | -12.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.46% | -19.61% | -4.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.46% | -27.56% | +3.10% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.46% | -29.55% | +5.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.05% | -7.25% | -14.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.16% | -27.34% | +11.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.49% | 4.42% | +4.07% |
Volatility
GLD vs. CMS - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) has a higher volatility of 7.79% compared to CMS Energy Corporation (CMS) at 7.02%. This indicates that GLD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLD | CMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.79% | 7.02% | +0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.10% | 12.53% | +11.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.37% | 16.28% | +11.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.22% | 18.95% | -0.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.08% | 20.71% | -4.63% |
Dividends
GLD vs. CMS - Dividend Comparison
GLD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.02%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMS CMS Energy Corporation | 3.02% | 3.10% | 3.09% | 3.36% | 3.62% | 2.67% | 2.67% | 2.43% | 2.88% | 2.81% | 2.98% | 3.22% |
GLD SPDR Gold Shares | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLD and CMS have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLD has higher volatility (7.79%) compared to CMS (7.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLD dropped -45.56% vs CMS's -91.20%.
GLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.87 vs 0.44), 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.
Find the right allocation for GLD and CMS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer