GLTR vs. PALL
GLTR (Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) and PALL (Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF) are both Precious Metals funds from Aberdeen - GLTR tracks the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index while PALL tracks the Palladium London PM Fix ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLTR returned 13.17%/yr vs 8.36%/yr for PALL. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.
Performance
GLTR vs. PALL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLTR achieves a 1.47% return, which is significantly higher than PALL's -18.39% return. Over the past 10 years, GLTR has outperformed PALL with an annualized return of 13.17%, while PALL has yielded a comparatively lower 8.36% annualized return.
GLTR
- 1D
- -1.81%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- YTD
- 1.47%
- 6M
- 10.73%
- 1Y
- 53.06%
- 3Y*
- 32.36%
- 5Y*
- 15.32%
- 10Y*
- 13.17%
PALL
- 1D
- -4.89%
- 1M
- -11.74%
- YTD
- -18.39%
- 6M
- -11.90%
- 1Y
- 28.17%
- 3Y*
- -3.26%
- 5Y*
- -14.89%
- 10Y*
- 8.36%
GLTR vs. PALL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF | 1.47% | 87.25% | 20.63% | 2.01% | -0.25% | -9.60% | 29.52% | 20.96% | -2.85% | 12.94% |
PALL Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF | -18.39% | 74.07% | -17.38% | -38.77% | -6.28% | -23.26% | 25.27% | 53.94% | 17.23% | 55.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLTR and PALL is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2010 | 0.59 |
The correlation between GLTR and PALL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.65 - 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
GLTR vs. PALL — Risk / Return Rank
GLTR
PALL
GLTR vs. PALL - 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 Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL). 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 | PALL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.14 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.80 | 0.78 | +1.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.13 | 1.74 | +2.40 |
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
| GLTR | PALL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.42 | 0.56 | +0.86 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | -0.35 | +1.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.64 | 0.22 | +0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.32 | 0.18 | +0.15 |
Drawdowns
GLTR vs. PALL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLTR drawdown since its inception was -55.70%, smaller than the maximum PALL drawdown of -73.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLTR and PALL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLTR | PALL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.70% | -73.63% | +17.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.70% | -36.18% | +6.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.70% | -40.47% | +10.77% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.70% | -73.63% | +43.93% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.70% | -73.63% | +43.93% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -26.86% | -59.78% | +32.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.83% | -26.81% | -2.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.88% | 16.25% | -3.37% |
Volatility
GLTR vs. PALL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) is 9.13%, while Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL) has a volatility of 10.54%. This indicates that GLTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PALL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLTR | PALL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.13% | 10.54% | -1.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 35.41% | 41.87% | -6.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 37.58% | 50.24% | -12.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.63% | 42.46% | -18.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.50% | 37.91% | -17.41% |
GLTR vs. PALL - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GLTR and PALL have an expense ratio of 0.60%.
Dividends
GLTR vs. PALL - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLTR nor PALL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GLTR and PALL have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PALL has higher volatility (10.54%) compared to GLTR (9.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLTR dropped -55.70% vs PALL's -73.63%.
On 10-year performance, GLTR leads with 13.17% vs 8.36% for PALL. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 9.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GLTR has performed better with a 13.17% return vs 8.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLTR and PALL have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.
GLTR and PALL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index, while PALL tracks Palladium London PM Fix ($/ozt).
GLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.42 vs 0.56), 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 GLTR and PALL
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