GXC vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - GXC is a China Equities fund tracking the S&P China BMI Index, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GXC returned -5.93%/yr vs 17.62%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GXC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

GXC vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GXC achieves a -10.30% return, which is significantly lower than GLDM's -6.69% return.

GXC

• 1D: -1.11%
• 1M: -7.56%
• YTD: -10.30%
• 6M: -11.66%
• 1Y: 0.21%
• 3Y*: 8.69%
• 5Y*: -5.93%
• 10Y*: 4.93%

GLDM

• 1D: 0.98%
• 1M: -10.71%
• YTD: -6.69%
• 6M: -10.19%
• 1Y: 20.64%
• 3Y*: 27.80%
• 5Y*: 17.62%
• 10Y*: —

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

GXC vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF	-10.30%	30.84%	14.60%	-9.93%	-22.12%	-19.70%	28.31%	23.07%	-18.74%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	-6.69%	64.20%	27.08%	13.04%	-0.47%	-4.01%	25.10%	18.10%	1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between GXC and GLDM is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2018	0.17

Over the past year, GXC and GLDM have become more correlated (0.39) than their long-term average of 0.17, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

GXC vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

GXC

GXC Risk / Return Rank: 9
GXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
GXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
GXC Omega Ratio Rank: 9
GXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
GXC Martin Ratio Rank: 9

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 22
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 25
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

GXC vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). 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.

	GXC	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.01	0.75	-0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.15	1.10	-0.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.16	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.01	0.79	-0.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.03	2.22	-2.19

GXC vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GXC Sharpe Ratio is 0.01, which is lower than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 0.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GXC and GLDM, 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

GXC vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GXC drawdown since its inception was -71.96%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -26.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXC and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	GXC	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.96%	-26.11%	-45.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.50%	-26.11%	+8.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.54%	-26.11%	+0.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-53.99%	-26.11%	-27.88%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-60.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.61%	-25.39%	-11.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.83%	-6.34%	-22.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.01%	9.33%	-2.32%

Volatility

GXC vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) is 5.98%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 8.68%. This indicates that GXC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GXC	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.98%	8.68%	-2.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.11%	24.32%	-10.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.96%	27.50%	-8.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.01%	18.21%	+10.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.05%	17.05%	+9.00%

GXC vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

GXC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

GXC vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF	2.31%	2.40%	2.81%	3.70%	2.67%	1.35%	1.04%	1.60%	2.03%	1.84%	2.05%	2.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GXC and GLDM in my portfolio?

GXC and GLDM have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GXC or GLDM?

GLDM has higher volatility (8.68%) compared to GXC (5.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GXC dropped -71.96% vs GLDM's -26.11%.

Which ETF is better, GXC or GLDM?

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 17.62% vs -5.93% for GXC. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 5.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GXC or GLDM?

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 17.62% return vs -5.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GXC or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for GXC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GXC or GLDM?

GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

What is the main difference between GXC and GLDM?

GXC is categorized as China Equities, while GLDM is Gold. GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for GXC and 0.10% for GLDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.75 vs 0.01), 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.