GMF vs. GLD
GMF (SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF) and GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - GMF is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index, while GLD is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GMF returned 10.31%/yr vs 11.30%/yr for GLD. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GMF charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GLD.
Performance
GMF vs. GLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GMF achieves a 11.36% return, which is significantly higher than GLD's -6.77% return. Over the past 10 years, GMF has underperformed GLD with an annualized return of 10.31%, while GLD has yielded a comparatively higher 11.30% annualized return.
GMF
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- -0.77%
- YTD
- 11.36%
- 6M
- 11.27%
- 1Y
- 23.99%
- 3Y*
- 18.52%
- 5Y*
- 5.05%
- 10Y*
- 10.31%
GLD
- 1D
- 0.97%
- 1M
- -10.76%
- YTD
- -6.77%
- 6M
- -10.31%
- 1Y
- 20.30%
- 3Y*
- 27.44%
- 5Y*
- 17.27%
- 10Y*
- 11.30%
GMF vs. GLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF | 11.36% | 21.99% | 16.55% | 8.20% | -18.99% | -1.93% | 24.96% | 19.92% | -14.25% | 41.71% |
GLD SPDR Gold Shares | -6.77% | 63.68% | 26.66% | 12.69% | -0.77% | -4.15% | 24.81% | 17.86% | -1.94% | 12.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between GMF and GLD is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2007 | 0.16 |
The correlation between GMF and GLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (all time) to 0.35 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
GMF vs. GLD — Risk / Return Rank
GMF
GLD
GMF vs. GLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| GMF | GLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.16 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.91 | 0.78 | +1.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.90 | 2.17 | +4.73 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GMF vs. GLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GMF drawdown since its inception was -67.18%, which is greater than GLD's maximum drawdown of -45.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMF and GLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GMF | GLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.18% | -45.56% | -21.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.62% | -26.21% | +13.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.43% | -26.21% | +4.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.76% | -26.21% | -9.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.18% | -26.21% | -13.97% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.23% | -25.50% | +21.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.55% | -16.17% | -0.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.49% | 9.38% | -5.89% |
Volatility
GMF vs. GLD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) is 7.93%, while SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) has a volatility of 8.70%. This indicates that GMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GMF | GLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.93% | 8.70% | -0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.27% | 24.48% | -9.21% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.63% | 27.71% | -10.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.78% | 18.30% | +0.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.22% | 16.07% | +3.15% |
GMF vs. GLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
GMF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than GLD's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
GMF vs. GLD - Dividend Comparison
GMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, while GLD has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLD SPDR Gold Shares | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF | 1.21% | 1.49% | 1.92% | 2.75% | 2.54% | 2.71% | 1.32% | 1.75% | 2.26% | 1.70% | 2.49% | 3.76% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GMF and GLD have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLD has higher volatility (8.70%) compared to GMF (7.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMF dropped -67.18% vs GLD's -45.56%.
On 10-year performance, GLD leads with 11.30% vs 10.31% for GMF. On fees, GLD is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 7.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GLD has performed better with a 11.30% return vs 10.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLD is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GMF.
GMF has the higher dividend yield at 1.21%, compared with 0.00% for GLD.
GMF is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while GLD is Gold. GMF tracks S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index, while GLD tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GMF and 0.40% for GLD.
GMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.74), 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 GMF and GLD
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