GLD vs. CWB
GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) and CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLD is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM, while CWB is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLD returned 11.27%/yr vs 11.62%/yr for CWB. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.40% expense ratio.
Performance
GLD vs. CWB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLD achieves a -7.24% return, which is significantly lower than CWB's 14.96% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GLD having a 11.27% annualized return and CWB not far ahead at 11.62%.
GLD
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- -5.04%
- 6M
- -12.74%
- YTD
- -7.24%
- 1Y
- 19.20%
- 3Y*
- 26.36%
- 5Y*
- 16.85%
- 10Y*
- 11.27%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.24%
CWB
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- -7.84%
- 6M
- 9.22%
- YTD
- 14.96%
- 1Y
- 21.43%
- 3Y*
- 14.79%
- 5Y*
- 5.52%
- 10Y*
- 11.62%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.57%
GLD vs. CWB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLD SPDR Gold Shares | -7.24% | 63.68% | 26.66% | 12.69% | -0.77% | -4.15% | 24.81% | 17.86% | -1.94% | 12.81% |
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 14.96% | 16.61% | 10.06% | 14.49% | -20.81% | 2.18% | 53.39% | 22.39% | -2.00% | 15.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLD and CWB is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2009 | 0.09 |
Over the past year, GLD and CWB have become more correlated (0.30) than their long-term average of 0.09, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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. CWB — Risk / Return Rank
GLD
CWB
GLD vs. CWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB). 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 | CWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.66 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.83 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.24 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.73 | 2.60 | -1.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.71 | 8.03 | -6.33 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLD vs. CWB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLD drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, which is greater than CWB's maximum drawdown of -32.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLD and CWB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLD | CWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.56% | -32.06% | -13.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.40% | -8.28% | -18.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.40% | -11.92% | -14.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.40% | -28.41% | +2.01% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -26.40% | -32.06% | +5.66% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.87% | -7.98% | -17.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.19% | -6.15% | -10.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.28% | 2.67% | +8.61% |
Volatility
GLD vs. CWB - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) has a higher volatility of 6.38% compared to SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) at 5.19%. This indicates that GLD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CWB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLD | CWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.38% | 5.19% | +1.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.20% | 13.31% | +10.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.06% | 16.01% | +12.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.42% | 13.33% | +5.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.11% | 14.62% | +1.49% |
GLD vs. CWB - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GLD and CWB have an expense ratio of 0.40%.
Dividends
GLD vs. CWB - Dividend Comparison
GLD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 1.45% | 1.69% | 1.85% | 1.97% | 2.21% | 1.97% | 2.34% | 3.03% | 6.17% | 4.25% | 4.60% | 7.52% |
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 CWB have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLD has higher volatility (6.38%) compared to CWB (5.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLD dropped -45.56% vs CWB's -32.06%.
On 10-year performance, CWB leads with 11.62% vs 11.27% for GLD. Both ETFs have the same 0.40% expense ratio. On volatility, CWB has been the lower-risk option at 5.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CWB has performed better with a 11.62% return vs 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLD and CWB have the same expense ratio: 0.40% per year.
CWB has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 0.00% for GLD.
GLD is categorized as Gold, while CWB is Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds. GLD tracks LBMA Gold Price PM, while CWB tracks Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond.
CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs 0.69), 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 CWB
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