PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C) (GLDA.DE) and Amundi Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF EUR (6AQQ.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLDA.DE achieves a -5.47% return, which is significantly lower than 6AQQ.DE's 18.86% return.


GLDA.DE

1D
0.00%
1M
-2.58%
6M
-15.18%
YTD
-5.47%
1Y
21.05%
3Y*
26.12%
5Y*
18.65%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
15.52%

6AQQ.DE

1D
0.46%
1M
-1.34%
6M
21.85%
YTD
18.86%
1Y
29.96%
3Y*
23.06%
5Y*
15.53%
10Y*
20.21%
ALL TIME*
20.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
€3.29M€1.96M€1.62M
€2.06M€2.09M€2.29M

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
GLDA.DE
Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C)
-5.47%48.99%34.24%9.40%7.00%3.88%12.92%6.37%
6AQQ.DE
Amundi Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF EUR
18.86%7.08%33.77%51.54%-29.96%39.62%34.72%11.53%

Correlation

The correlation between GLDA.DE and 6AQQ.DE is 0.26, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.26

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.09

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 22, 2019

0.02

Over the past year, GLDA.DE and 6AQQ.DE have become more correlated (0.26) than their long-term average of 0.02, 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

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GLDA.DE
GLDA.DE Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
GLDA.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDA.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDA.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDA.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDA.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

6AQQ.DE
6AQQ.DE Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
6AQQ.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
6AQQ.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
6AQQ.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
6AQQ.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
6AQQ.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C) (GLDA.DE) and Amundi Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF EUR (6AQQ.DE). 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.


GLDA.DE6AQQ.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.90

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.31

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.94

2.98

-2.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.96

7.96

-6.00

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLDA.DE Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is lower than the 6AQQ.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLDA.DE and 6AQQ.DE, 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...

Drawdowns

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLDA.DE drawdown since its inception was -22.55%, smaller than the maximum 6AQQ.DE drawdown of -31.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDA.DE and 6AQQ.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GLDA.DE6AQQ.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.55%

-31.19%

+8.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.55%

-10.01%

-12.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.55%

-26.73%

+4.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.55%

-31.19%

+8.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-21.79%

-2.72%

-19.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.14%

-5.34%

-0.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.74%

3.75%

+6.99%

Volatility

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C) (GLDA.DE) and Amundi Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF EUR (6AQQ.DE) have volatilities of 5.98% and 6.23%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GLDA.DE6AQQ.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.98%

6.23%

-0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.06%

12.94%

+5.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.75%

16.99%

+7.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.54%

20.10%

-3.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.13%

19.77%

-3.64%

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLDA.DE has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than 6AQQ.DE's 0.23% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

GLDA.DE vs. 6AQQ.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLDA.DE nor 6AQQ.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GLDA.DE and 6AQQ.DE have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GLDA.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GLDA.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for 6AQQ.DE.

GLDA.DE is categorized as Gold, while 6AQQ.DE is Nasdaq-100. GLDA.DE tracks Gold, while 6AQQ.DE tracks Nasdaq 100®. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GLDA.DE and 0.23% for 6AQQ.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GLDA.DE and 6AQQ.DE

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