HUG.TO vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HUG.TO (Global X Gold ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both Gold funds - HUG.TO tracks the Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER while GLDM tracks the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HUG.TO returned 15.83%/yr vs 21.88%/yr for GLDM. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HUG.TO charges 0.54%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

HUG.TO is traded in CAD, while GLDM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GLDM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUG.TO achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than GLDM's 4.31% return.

HUG.TO

• 1D: -1.21%
• 1M: -1.86%
• YTD: 1.43%
• 6M: 3.69%
• 1Y: 27.81%
• 3Y*: 27.56%
• 5Y*: 15.83%
• 10Y*: 10.69%

GLDM

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 4.31%
• 6M: 5.19%
• 1Y: 34.13%
• 3Y*: 33.02%
• 5Y*: 21.88%
• 10Y*: —

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

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HUG.TO Global X Gold ETF	1.43%	57.93%	24.13%	11.48%	-1.87%	-5.30%	19.82%	15.86%	0.53%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	4.31%	56.67%	38.00%	10.55%	6.63%	-4.88%	22.98%	12.29%	4.44%

Correlation

The correlation between HUG.TO and GLDM is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2018	0.77

The correlation between HUG.TO and GLDM shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (all time) to 0.92 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HUG.TO	GLDM
Real Estate	8.8%	-
Basic Materials	-	100.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

HUG.TO vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

HUG.TO

HUG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 28
HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
HUG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
HUG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 31
HUG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
HUG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 26

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 32
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 36
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) 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.

	HUG.TO	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.06	1.36	-0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	1.78	-0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.27	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.45	1.99	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.47	4.90	-1.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.06, which is comparable to the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUG.TO 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HUG.TO	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.06	1.36	-0.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87	1.31	-0.44
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.65	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	1.10	-0.67

Drawdowns

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUG.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.99%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -22.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUG.TO and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	HUG.TO	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.99%	-22.74%	-25.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.27%	-17.22%	-2.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.27%	-17.22%	-2.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.06%	-17.36%	-4.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.57%	-15.33%	-3.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.96%	-7.08%	-15.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.03%	6.98%	+1.05%

Volatility

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.89% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 5.33%. This indicates that HUG.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HUG.TO	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.89%	5.33%	+0.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.75%	21.65%	+1.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.49%	25.17%	+1.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.25%	16.78%	+1.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.41%	16.14%	+0.27%

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

HUG.TO has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

HUG.TO vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

Neither HUG.TO nor GLDM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HUG.TO and GLDM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, HUG.TO and GLDM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, HUG.TO or GLDM?

On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HUG.TO or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for HUG.TO.

What is the main difference between HUG.TO and GLDM?

HUG.TO tracks Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: Global X and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for HUG.TO and 0.10% for GLDM.