GS vs. CEF
GS (The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.) is a stock, while CEF (Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust) is Gold fund actively managed by Sprott. Over the past 10 years, GS returned 24.48%/yr vs 12.56%/yr for CEF. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
GS vs. CEF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GS achieves a 22.08% return, which is significantly higher than CEF's -4.91% return. Over the past 10 years, GS has outperformed CEF with an annualized return of 24.48%, while CEF has yielded a comparatively lower 12.56% annualized return.
GS
- 1D
- 2.62%
- 1M
- 12.54%
- YTD
- 22.08%
- 6M
- 20.84%
- 1Y
- 76.70%
- 3Y*
- 49.31%
- 5Y*
- 25.98%
- 10Y*
- 24.48%
CEF
- 1D
- 0.62%
- 1M
- -9.04%
- YTD
- -4.91%
- 6M
- 0.53%
- 1Y
- 40.89%
- 3Y*
- 33.17%
- 5Y*
- 16.96%
- 10Y*
- 12.56%
GS vs. CEF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GS The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. | 22.08% | 56.64% | 52.03% | 15.91% | -7.87% | 47.61% | 17.45% | 40.48% | -33.53% | 7.73% |
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust | -4.91% | 92.76% | 24.07% | 6.80% | 1.07% | -8.32% | 31.99% | 16.91% | -6.34% | 18.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between GS and CEF is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 1999 | 0.01 |
Over the past year, GS and CEF have become more correlated (0.24) than their long-term average of 0.01, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
GS vs. CEF — Risk / Return Rank
GS
CEF
GS vs. CEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) 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.
| GS | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.22 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.80 | 1.41 | +2.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.61 | 3.72 | +8.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GS vs. CEF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GS drawdown since its inception was -78.84%, which is greater than CEF's maximum drawdown of -62.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GS and CEF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GS | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.84% | -62.29% | -16.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.42% | -30.01% | +10.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.90% | -30.01% | -0.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.84% | -30.01% | -2.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.75% | -30.01% | -18.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.73% | -26.45% | +23.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.65% | -27.33% | +4.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.84% | 11.35% | -5.51% |
Volatility
GS vs. CEF - Volatility Comparison
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) and Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) have volatilities of 11.84% and 11.51%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GS | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.84% | 11.51% | +0.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.47% | 36.13% | -12.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.55% | 38.81% | -10.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.10% | 24.54% | +3.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.87% | 21.96% | +7.91% |
Dividends
GS vs. CEF - Dividend Comparison
GS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, 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% |
GS The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. | 1.60% | 1.59% | 2.01% | 2.72% | 2.62% | 1.70% | 1.90% | 1.80% | 1.89% | 1.14% | 1.09% | 1.41% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GS and CEF have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GS has higher volatility (11.84%) compared to CEF (11.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GS dropped -78.84% vs CEF's -62.29%.
GS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.09), 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 GS and CEF
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