GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GLDN.AX (Ishares Physical Gold ETF) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM AUD Index, while ^GSPC (S&P 500 Index) is an index. Over the past year, GLDN.AX returned 20.68% vs 15.96% for ^GSPC. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a A$10,000 investment in Ishares Physical Gold ETF (GLDN.AX) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

GLDN.AX is traded in AUD, while ^GSPC is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ^GSPC values have been converted to AUD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLDN.AX achieves a -3.58% return, which is significantly lower than ^GSPC's 4.00% return.

GLDN.AX

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: -1.25%
• YTD: -3.58%
• 6M: -1.13%
• 1Y: 20.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

^GSPC

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 5.57%
• YTD: 4.00%
• 6M: 2.84%
• 1Y: 15.96%
• 3Y*: 18.21%
• 5Y*: 14.32%
• 10Y*: 14.05%

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

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GLDN.AX Ishares Physical Gold ETF	-3.58%	55.11%	38.15%	-2.11%
^GSPC S&P 500 Index	4.00%	7.94%	35.72%	4.37%

Correlation

The correlation between GLDN.AX and ^GSPC is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2023	0.03

Return for Risk

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLDN.AX

GLDN.AX Risk / Return Rank: 23
GLDN.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
GLDN.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
GLDN.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 28
GLDN.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
GLDN.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 20

^GSPC

^GSPC Risk / Return Rank: 80
^GSPC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
^GSPC Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
^GSPC Omega Ratio Rank: 79
^GSPC Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
^GSPC Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ishares Physical Gold ETF (GLDN.AX) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). 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.

	GLDN.AX	^GSPC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.83	1.60	-0.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.23	2.22	-0.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.30	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.96	1.37	-0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.23	3.82	-1.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLDN.AX Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the ^GSPC Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLDN.AX and ^GSPC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GLDN.AX	^GSPC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83	1.60	-0.76
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.99	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.86	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.62	0.60	+1.02

Drawdowns

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLDN.AX drawdown since its inception was -21.43%, smaller than the maximum ^GSPC drawdown of -41.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDN.AX and ^GSPC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLDN.AX	^GSPC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.43%	-41.25%	+19.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.43%	-11.69%	-9.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.74%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.01%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.00%	0.00%	-20.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.25%	-11.09%	+6.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.22%	4.19%	+5.03%

Volatility

GLDN.AX vs. ^GSPC - Volatility Comparison

Ishares Physical Gold ETF (GLDN.AX) has a higher volatility of 4.92% compared to S&P 500 Index (^GSPC) at 1.73%. This indicates that GLDN.AX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ^GSPC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLDN.AX	^GSPC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.92%	1.73%	+3.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.11%	7.50%	+13.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.58%	10.04%	+14.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.49%	14.57%	+4.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.49%	16.33%	+3.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLDN.AX and ^GSPC in my portfolio?

GLDN.AX and ^GSPC have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.