GLD vs. FGDL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) and FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) are both Gold funds - GLD tracks the LBMA Gold Price PM while FGDL tracks the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GLD returned 27.10%/yr vs 27.36%/yr for FGDL. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. GLD charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FGDL.

Performance

GLD vs. FGDL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with GLD having a -7.67% return and FGDL slightly lower at -7.99%.

GLD

• 1D: -3.02%
• 1M: -11.58%
• YTD: -7.67%
• 6M: -11.17%
• 1Y: 19.51%
• 3Y*: 27.10%
• 5Y*: 17.04%
• 10Y*: 11.25%

FGDL

• 1D: -3.28%
• 1M: -11.58%
• YTD: -7.99%
• 6M: -11.39%
• 1Y: 19.61%
• 3Y*: 27.36%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GLD vs. FGDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GLD SPDR Gold Shares	-7.67%	63.68%	26.66%	12.69%	0.09%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	-7.99%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.72%

Correlation

The correlation between GLD and FGDL is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2022	0.99

The correlation between GLD and FGDL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLD vs. FGDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLD

GLD Risk / Return Rank: 21
GLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
GLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
GLD Omega Ratio Rank: 23
GLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
GLD Martin Ratio Rank: 19

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 21
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 23
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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. FGDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). 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	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	0.70	0.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.05	1.04	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.15	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.75	0.74	0.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.12	2.10	+0.02

GLD vs. FGDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLD Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is comparable to the FGDL Sharpe Ratio of 0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLD and FGDL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GLD vs. FGDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLD drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, which is greater than FGDL's maximum drawdown of -26.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLD and FGDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLD	FGDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.56%	-26.48%	-19.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.21%	-26.48%	+0.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.21%	-26.48%	+0.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.21%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-26.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.21%	-26.48%	+0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.17%	-4.10%	-12.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.24%	9.38%	-0.14%

Volatility

GLD vs. FGDL - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) have volatilities of 8.58% and 8.93%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLD	FGDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.58%	8.93%	-0.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.57%	24.70%	-0.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.75%	28.04%	-0.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.30%	19.39%	-1.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.07%	19.39%	-3.32%

GLD vs. FGDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLD has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than FGDL's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLD vs. FGDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLD nor FGDL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLD and FGDL in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, GLD and FGDL move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GLD or FGDL?

FGDL has higher volatility (8.93%) compared to GLD (8.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLD dropped -45.56% vs FGDL's -26.48%.

Which ETF is better, GLD or FGDL?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 27.36% vs 27.10% for GLD. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, GLD has been the lower-risk option at 8.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLD or FGDL?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 27.36% return vs 27.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLD or FGDL?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLD or FGDL?

GLD and FGDL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GLD and FGDL?

GLD tracks LBMA Gold Price PM, while FGDL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). They also come from different issuers: State Street and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GLD and 0.15% for FGDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.71 vs 0.70), 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.