GPZ vs. CEF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

GPZ (VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF) and CEF (Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust) are both funds - GPZ is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Alternative Asset Managers Index, while CEF is a Gold fund actively managed by Sprott. GPZ is passively managed, while CEF is actively managed. Over the past year, GPZ returned -14.79% vs 30.45% for CEF. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GPZ charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for CEF.

Performance

GPZ vs. CEF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) 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, GPZ achieves a -14.18% return, which is significantly lower than CEF's -12.64% return.

GPZ

• 1D: 1.04%
• 1M: 6.01%
• 6M: -11.09%
• YTD: -14.18%
• 1Y: -14.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -5.45%

CEF

• 1D: -2.10%
• 1M: -3.19%
• 6M: -19.38%
• YTD: -12.64%
• 1Y: 30.45%
• 3Y*: 29.51%
• 5Y*: 16.50%
• 10Y*: 10.54%
• ALL TIME*: 5.76%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust	$23.56M	$24.31M	$29.31M
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF	$3.00M	$3.53M	$4.16M

GPZ vs. CEF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF	-14.18%	9.24%
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust	-12.64%	52.72%

Correlation

The correlation between GPZ and CEF is 0.20, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025	0.15

Return for Risk

GPZ vs. CEF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GPZ

GPZ Risk / Return Rank: 5
GPZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
GPZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
GPZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5
GPZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
GPZ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

CEF

CEF Risk / Return Rank: 23
CEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
CEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
CEF Omega Ratio Rank: 30
CEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
CEF Martin Ratio Rank: 15

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GPZ vs. CEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) 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.

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.

	GPZ	CEF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.60	0.82	-1.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.68	1.20	-1.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.18	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.53	0.97	-1.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.94	2.07	-3.01

GPZ vs. CEF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.60, which is lower than the CEF Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPZ 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.

Drawdowns

GPZ vs. CEF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPZ drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, smaller than the maximum CEF drawdown of -62.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPZ and CEF.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPZ	CEF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-62.29%	+30.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.72%	-34.12%	+2.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.12%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.12%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.16%	-32.43%	+11.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.41%	-27.35%	+13.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.72%	15.94%	+1.78%

Volatility

GPZ vs. CEF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) is 7.01%, while Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) has a volatility of 8.59%. This indicates that GPZ 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

	GPZ	CEF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.01%	8.59%	-1.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.44%	35.16%	-12.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.83%	40.14%	-12.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.37%	24.95%	+2.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.37%	22.06%	+5.31%

GPZ vs. CEF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPZ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CEF's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPZ vs. CEF - Dividend Comparison

GPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, while CEF has not 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%
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF	0.96%	0.83%	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 GPZ and CEF in my portfolio?

GPZ and CEF have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GPZ or CEF?

CEF has higher volatility (8.59%) compared to GPZ (7.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPZ dropped -31.72% vs CEF's -62.29%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.82 vs -0.60), 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.