GLDB vs. BAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GLDB (Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF) and BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - GLDB is a Nontraditional Bonds fund tracking the Solactive Gold Backed Bond Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BAR is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLDB charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for BAR.

Performance

GLDB vs. BAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF (GLDB) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLDB achieves a -18.42% return, which is significantly lower than BAR's -4.82% return.

GLDB

• 1D: -3.65%
• 1M: -16.66%
• YTD: -18.42%
• 6M: -20.43%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAR

• 1D: -1.94%
• 1M: -8.92%
• YTD: -4.82%
• 6M: -8.73%
• 1Y: 21.40%
• 3Y*: 28.63%
• 5Y*: 18.08%
• 10Y*: —

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

GLDB vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GLDB Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF	-18.42%	-3.56%
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	-4.82%	4.73%

Correlation

The correlation between GLDB and BAR is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2025	0.81

Return for Risk

GLDB vs. BAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLDB

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BAR

BAR Risk / Return Rank: 22
BAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
BAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
BAR Omega Ratio Rank: 25
BAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
BAR Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

GLDB vs. BAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF (GLDB) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR). 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.

	GLDB	BAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.78	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.14	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.17	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	0.88	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	2.37	—

Drawdowns

GLDB vs. BAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLDB drawdown since its inception was -35.08%, which is greater than BAR's maximum drawdown of -24.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDB and BAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLDB	BAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.08%	-24.38%	-10.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-24.38%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.08%	-23.93%	-11.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.76%	-6.53%	-8.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	9.07%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GLDB	BAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	8.11%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	24.24%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.15%	27.39%	+12.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.15%	18.14%	+22.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.15%	16.54%	+23.61%

GLDB vs. BAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLDB has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BAR's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLDB vs. BAR - Dividend Comparison

GLDB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, while BAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	0.00%	0.00%
GLDB Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF	0.23%	0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLDB and BAR in my portfolio?

GLDB and BAR have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GLDB or BAR?

On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLDB or BAR?

BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLDB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLDB or BAR?

GLDB has the higher dividend yield at 0.23%, compared with 0.00% for BAR.

What is the main difference between GLDB and BAR?

GLDB is categorized as Nontraditional Bonds, while BAR is Gold. GLDB tracks Solactive Gold Backed Bond Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). They also come from different issuers: Strategy Shares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for GLDB and 0.17% for BAR.