GLDM vs. BAR
GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) and BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) are both Gold funds - GLDM tracks the LBMA Gold Price PM while BAR tracks the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GLDM returned 17.81%/yr vs 17.73%/yr for BAR. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. GLDM charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for BAR.
Performance
GLDM vs. BAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLDM achieves a 0.06% return, which is significantly higher than BAR's 0.02% return.
GLDM
- 1D
- -3.67%
- 1M
- -8.00%
- YTD
- 0.06%
- 6M
- 2.68%
- 1Y
- 28.49%
- 3Y*
- 29.91%
- 5Y*
- 17.81%
- 10Y*
- —
BAR
- 1D
- -3.65%
- 1M
- -7.97%
- YTD
- 0.02%
- 6M
- 2.66%
- 1Y
- 28.36%
- 3Y*
- 29.83%
- 5Y*
- 17.73%
- 10Y*
- —
GLDM vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | 0.06% | 64.20% | 27.08% | 13.04% | -0.47% | -4.01% | 25.10% | 18.10% | 1.84% |
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | 0.02% | 64.12% | 26.97% | 12.96% | -0.55% | -3.92% | 25.02% | 18.16% | 1.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDM and BAR is 1.00 - 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 | 1.00 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2018 | 1.00 |
The correlation between GLDM and BAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 1.00 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GLDM vs. BAR — Risk / Return Rank
GLDM
BAR
GLDM vs. BAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) 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.
| GLDM | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.22 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.43 | 1.42 | +0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.63 | 3.60 | +0.03 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLDM | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.07 | 1.07 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.99 | 0.87 | +0.11 |
Drawdowns
GLDM vs. BAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDM drawdown since its inception was -21.63%, roughly equal to the maximum BAR drawdown of -21.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDM and BAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDM | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.63% | -21.53% | -0.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -20.00% | -20.05% | +0.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.00% | -20.05% | +0.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.92% | -20.91% | -0.01% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.00% | -20.05% | +0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.23% | -6.46% | +0.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.86% | 7.89% | -0.03% |
Volatility
GLDM vs. BAR - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) have volatilities of 5.65% and 5.66%, 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
| GLDM | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.65% | 5.66% | -0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.31% | 23.34% | -0.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.65% | 26.69% | -0.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.97% | 17.97% | 0.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.90% | 16.42% | +0.48% |
GLDM vs. BAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDM has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than BAR's 0.17% 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
GLDM vs. BAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLDM nor BAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 1.00, GLDM and BAR 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.
BAR has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to GLDM (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLDM dropped -21.63% vs BAR's -21.53%.
On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 17.81% vs 17.73% for BAR. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 17.81% return vs 17.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for BAR.
GLDM and BAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM, while BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). They also come from different issuers: State Street and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for GLDM and 0.17% for BAR.
GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.07 vs 1.07), 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 GLDM and BAR
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