GLDN vs. BAR
GLDN (Nicholas Gold Income ETF) and BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) are both Gold funds. GLDN is actively managed, while BAR is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLDN charges 1.07%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for BAR.
Performance
GLDN vs. BAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GLDN
- 1D
- -6.72%
- 1M
- -12.29%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAR
- 1D
- -3.65%
- 1M
- -7.97%
- YTD
- 0.02%
- 6M
- 2.66%
- 1Y
- 28.36%
- 3Y*
- 29.83%
- 5Y*
- 17.73%
- 10Y*
- —
GLDN vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GLDN Nicholas Gold Income ETF | -21.20% |
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | -13.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDN and BAR is 0.90, 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 Feb 19, 2026 | 0.90 |
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
GLDN vs. BAR — Risk / Return Rank
GLDN
BAR
GLDN vs. BAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nicholas Gold Income ETF (GLDN) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLDN | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.07 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.99 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -1.33 | 0.87 | -2.20 |
Drawdowns
GLDN vs. BAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDN drawdown since its inception was -28.04%, which is greater than BAR's maximum drawdown of -21.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDN and BAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDN | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.04% | -21.53% | -6.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -20.05% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.05% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.04% | -20.05% | -7.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.70% | -6.46% | -9.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 7.89% | — |
Volatility
GLDN vs. BAR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLDN | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.66% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 23.34% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 41.85% | 26.69% | +15.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 41.85% | 17.97% | +23.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 41.85% | 16.42% | +25.43% |
GLDN vs. BAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDN has a 1.07% expense ratio, which is higher than BAR's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLDN vs. BAR - Dividend Comparison
GLDN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.42%, while BAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | 0.00% |
GLDN Nicholas Gold Income ETF | 4.42% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLDN and BAR have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for GLDN.
GLDN has the higher dividend yield at 4.42%, compared with 0.00% for BAR.
They also come from different issuers: Nicholas and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 1.07% for GLDN and 0.17% for BAR.
Find the right allocation for GLDN 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