PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GLD vs. EDEN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GLD vs. EDEN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLD achieves a 0.24% return, which is significantly higher than EDEN's -5.83% return. Over the past 10 years, GLD has outperformed EDEN with an annualized return of 12.56%, while EDEN has yielded a comparatively lower 8.44% annualized return.


GLD

1D
0.26%
1M
-8.41%
YTD
0.24%
6M
3.07%
1Y
30.18%
3Y*
29.71%
5Y*
17.55%
10Y*
12.56%

EDEN

1D
-1.08%
1M
-3.88%
YTD
-5.83%
6M
-2.08%
1Y
-6.41%
3Y*
2.17%
5Y*
1.47%
10Y*
8.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GLD vs. EDEN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GLD
SPDR Gold Shares
0.24%63.68%26.66%12.69%-0.77%-4.15%24.81%17.86%-1.94%12.81%
EDEN
iShares MSCI Denmark ETF
-5.83%10.58%-3.94%17.99%-11.47%14.81%42.56%24.37%-14.43%35.39%

Correlation

The correlation between GLD and EDEN is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.23

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.21

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2012

0.14

The correlation between GLD and EDEN shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.28 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GLD vs. EDEN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GLD
EDEN

Basic Materials

100.0%
4.8%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

2.0%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.9%

Energy

-

1.1%

Financial Services

-

16.2%

Healthcare

-

34.8%

Industrials

-

31.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

1.1%

Utilities

-

3.9%

Basic Materials

GLD
100.0%
EDEN
4.8%

Communication Services

GLD

-

EDEN

-

Consumer Cyclical

GLD

-

EDEN
2.0%

Consumer Defensive

GLD

-

EDEN
4.9%

Energy

GLD

-

EDEN
1.1%

Financial Services

GLD

-

EDEN
16.2%

Healthcare

GLD

-

EDEN
34.8%

Industrials

GLD

-

EDEN
31.3%

Real Estate

GLD

-

EDEN

-

Technology

GLD

-

EDEN
1.1%

Utilities

GLD

-

EDEN
3.9%

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. EDEN — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLD
GLD Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
GLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLD Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
GLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLD Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

EDEN
EDEN Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
EDEN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EDEN Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
EDEN Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
EDEN Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
EDEN Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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.

GLD vs. EDEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN). 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.


GLDEDENDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

0.96

+0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.51

-0.30

+1.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.78

-0.63

+4.41

GLD vs. EDEN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is higher than the EDEN Sharpe Ratio of -0.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLD and EDEN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GLDEDENDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.13

-0.31

+1.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.98

0.07

+0.90

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

0.44

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.63

-0.04

Drawdowns

GLD vs. EDEN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLD drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, which is greater than EDEN's maximum drawdown of -36.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLD and EDEN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GLDEDENDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.56%

-36.61%

-8.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.10%

-21.17%

+1.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.10%

-29.31%

+9.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.03%

-36.61%

+15.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.00%

-36.61%

+14.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.89%

-16.04%

-3.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.16%

-7.37%

-8.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.01%

10.14%

-2.13%

Volatility

GLD vs. EDEN - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) has a higher volatility of 5.68% compared to iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) at 4.45%. This indicates that GLD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EDEN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GLDEDENDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.68%

4.45%

+1.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.47%

15.77%

+7.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.87%

20.91%

+5.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.07%

20.23%

-2.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.99%

19.44%

-3.45%

GLD vs. EDEN - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLD has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than EDEN's 0.53% expense ratio.


Dividends

GLD vs. EDEN - Dividend Comparison

GLD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EDEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EDEN
iShares MSCI Denmark ETF
2.96%2.79%1.50%1.92%1.47%0.74%0.42%2.36%2.01%2.03%1.28%1.46%
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 EDEN have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GLD has higher volatility (5.68%) compared to EDEN (4.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLD dropped -45.56% vs EDEN's -36.61%.

On 10-year performance, GLD leads with 12.56% vs 8.44% for EDEN. On fees, GLD is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, EDEN has been the lower-risk option at 4.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GLD has performed better with a 12.56% return vs 8.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GLD is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for EDEN.

EDEN has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 0.00% for GLD.

GLD is categorized as Gold, while EDEN is Europe Equities. GLD tracks LBMA Gold Price PM, while EDEN tracks MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GLD and 0.53% for EDEN.

GLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.13 vs -0.31), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GLD and EDEN

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