PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GMF vs. GLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GMF vs. GLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMF achieves a 13.96% return, which is significantly higher than GLD's 3.77% return. Over the past 10 years, GMF has underperformed GLD with an annualized return of 10.11%, while GLD has yielded a comparatively higher 13.21% annualized return.


GMF

1D
0.29%
1M
4.32%
YTD
13.96%
6M
14.78%
1Y
31.46%
3Y*
19.48%
5Y*
5.49%
10Y*
10.11%

GLD

1D
0.83%
1M
-1.67%
YTD
3.77%
6M
6.24%
1Y
32.28%
3Y*
31.19%
5Y*
18.35%
10Y*
13.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GMF vs. GLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GMF
SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF
13.96%21.99%16.55%8.20%-18.99%-1.93%24.96%19.92%-14.25%41.71%
GLD
SPDR Gold Shares
3.77%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 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.30

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.26

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2007

0.16

The correlation between GMF and GLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (all time) to 0.30 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GMF vs. GLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GMF
GLD

Technology

37.7%

-

Financial Services

11.9%

-

Consumer Cyclical

8.9%

-

Communication Services

5.0%

-

Industrials

4.6%

-

Basic Materials

3.7%
100.0%

Healthcare

2.1%

-

Consumer Defensive

1.7%

-

Energy

1.5%

-

Utilities

0.9%

-

Real Estate

0.6%

-

Technology

GMF
37.7%
GLD

-

Financial Services

GMF
11.9%
GLD

-

Consumer Cyclical

GMF
8.9%
GLD

-

Communication Services

GMF
5.0%
GLD

-

Industrials

GMF
4.6%
GLD

-

Basic Materials

GMF
3.7%
GLD
100.0%

Healthcare

GMF
2.1%
GLD

-

Consumer Defensive

GMF
1.7%
GLD

-

Energy

GMF
1.5%
GLD

-

Utilities

GMF
0.9%
GLD

-

Real Estate

GMF
0.6%
GLD

-

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

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

GMF
GMF Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

GLD
GLD Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
GLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLD Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
GLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLD Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


GMFGLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.24

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.50

1.69

+0.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.27

4.15

+5.13

GMF vs. GLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is higher than the GLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMF and GLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GMFGLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

1.22

+0.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

1.02

-0.73

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.83

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.60

-0.30

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


GMFGLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.18%

-45.56%

-21.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.62%

-19.21%

+6.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.43%

-19.21%

-2.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.76%

-21.03%

-14.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.18%

-22.00%

-18.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.01%

-17.07%

+16.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.59%

-16.16%

-0.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.40%

7.81%

-4.41%

Volatility

GMF vs. GLD - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) has a higher volatility of 6.11% compared to SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) at 5.50%. This indicates that GMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GMFGLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.11%

5.50%

+0.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.65%

23.16%

-9.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.50%

26.60%

-10.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.52%

18.00%

+0.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.19%

15.95%

+3.24%

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 1.31%, while GLD has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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
1.31%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 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GMF has higher volatility (6.11%) compared to GLD (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMF dropped -67.18% vs GLD's -45.56%.

On 10-year performance, GLD leads with 13.21% vs 10.11% for GMF. On fees, GLD is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, GLD has been the lower-risk option at 5.50%. 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 13.21% return vs 10.11%. 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 1.31%, 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 (1.92 vs 1.22), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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