GLTR vs. CEF

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

GLTR (Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) and CEF (Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust) are both Precious Metals funds. GLTR is passively managed, while CEF is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLTR returned 13.38%/yr vs 14.00%/yr for CEF. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for CEF.

Performance

GLTR vs. CEF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) and Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLTR achieves a 3.34% return, which is significantly higher than CEF's 2.95% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GLTR having a 13.38% annualized return and CEF not far ahead at 14.00%.

GLTR

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: -2.11%
• YTD: 3.34%
• 6M: 12.84%
• 1Y: 54.71%
• 3Y*: 33.17%
• 5Y*: 15.94%
• 10Y*: 13.38%

CEF

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -1.57%
• YTD: 2.95%
• 6M: 12.24%
• 1Y: 56.70%
• 3Y*: 36.28%
• 5Y*: 18.87%
• 10Y*: 14.00%

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

GLTR vs. CEF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	3.34%	87.25%	20.63%	2.01%	-0.25%	-9.60%	29.52%	20.96%	-2.85%	12.94%
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust	2.95%	92.76%	24.07%	6.80%	1.07%	-8.32%	31.99%	16.91%	-6.34%	18.78%

Correlation

The correlation between GLTR and CEF is 0.97 - 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	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2010	0.91

The correlation between GLTR and CEF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLTR vs. CEF — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLTR

GLTR Risk / Return Rank: 38
GLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
GLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
GLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 46
GLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
GLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 31

CEF

CEF Risk / Return Rank: 27
CEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
CEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
CEF Omega Ratio Rank: 31
CEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
CEF Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

GLTR vs. CEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) and Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF). 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.

	GLTR	CEF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.47	1.51	-0.04
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.77	1.83	-0.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.29	0.00
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.00	2.33	-0.32
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.66	6.00	-1.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GLTR vs. CEF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLTR Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is comparable to the CEF Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLTR and CEF, 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

	GLTR	CEF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.47	1.51	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	0.78	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66	0.64	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.23	+0.10

Drawdowns

GLTR vs. CEF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLTR drawdown since its inception was -55.70%, smaller than the maximum CEF drawdown of -62.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLTR and CEF.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLTR	CEF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.70%	-62.29%	+6.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.70%	-26.77%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.70%	-26.77%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.70%	-26.77%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-29.70%	-29.10%	-0.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.51%	-20.37%	-5.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.83%	-27.34%	-1.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.76%	10.38%	+2.38%

Volatility

GLTR vs. CEF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) is 9.28%, while Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) has a volatility of 10.23%. This indicates that GLTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CEF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLTR	CEF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.28%	10.23%	-0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.36%	35.11%	+0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.64%	37.94%	-0.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.63%	24.26%	-0.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.50%	21.82%	-1.32%

GLTR vs. CEF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLTR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CEF's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLTR vs. CEF - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLTR nor CEF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.08%	0.07%	0.09%	0.10%
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLTR and CEF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, GLTR and CEF 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.

Which is riskier, GLTR or CEF?

CEF has higher volatility (10.23%) compared to GLTR (9.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLTR dropped -55.70% vs CEF's -62.29%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 1.47), 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.