LVHI vs. FGDL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LVHI (Legg Mason International Low Volatility High Dividend ETF) and FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LVHI is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the QS International Low Volatility High Dividend Hedged Index, while FGDL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LVHI returned 20.91%/yr vs 31.32%/yr for FGDL. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LVHI charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FGDL.

Performance

LVHI vs. FGDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Legg Mason International Low Volatility High Dividend ETF (LVHI) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LVHI achieves a 11.71% return, which is significantly higher than FGDL's 2.43% return.

LVHI

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.49%
• YTD: 11.71%
• 6M: 13.79%
• 1Y: 29.95%
• 3Y*: 20.91%
• 5Y*: 15.80%
• 10Y*: —

FGDL

• 1D: -1.09%
• 1M: -1.94%
• YTD: 2.43%
• 6M: 4.89%
• 1Y: 31.70%
• 3Y*: 31.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LVHI vs. FGDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LVHI Legg Mason International Low Volatility High Dividend ETF	11.71%	27.12%	14.81%	17.45%	4.65%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	2.43%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between LVHI and FGDL is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022	0.19

Return for Risk

LVHI vs. FGDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LVHI

LVHI Risk / Return Rank: 89
LVHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
LVHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
LVHI Omega Ratio Rank: 90
LVHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
LVHI Martin Ratio Rank: 89

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 31
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

LVHI vs. FGDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Legg Mason International Low Volatility High Dividend ETF (LVHI) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). 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.

	LVHI	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	1.19	+2.00
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.37	1.57	+2.79
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.24	+0.36
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.95	1.66	+3.30
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.63	4.03	+16.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LVHI vs. FGDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LVHI Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is higher than the FGDL Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LVHI and FGDL, 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

	LVHI	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.19	1.19	+2.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.44	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.82	1.35	-0.53

Drawdowns

LVHI vs. FGDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LVHI drawdown since its inception was -32.31%, which is greater than FGDL's maximum drawdown of -19.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LVHI and FGDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LVHI	FGDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.31%	-19.23%	-13.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.08%	-19.23%	+13.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.99%	-19.23%	+7.24%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.56%	-18.16%	+16.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.52%	-3.83%	+0.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.46%	7.88%	-6.42%

Volatility

LVHI vs. FGDL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Legg Mason International Low Volatility High Dividend ETF (LVHI) is 3.05%, while Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) has a volatility of 5.61%. This indicates that LVHI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FGDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LVHI	FGDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.05%	5.61%	-2.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.50%	23.18%	-15.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.45%	26.78%	-17.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.06%	19.03%	-7.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.76%	19.03%	-5.27%

LVHI vs. FGDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LVHI has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than FGDL's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

LVHI vs. FGDL - Dividend Comparison

LVHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.50%, while FGDL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LVHI Legg Mason International Low Volatility High Dividend ETF	4.50%	4.92%	3.98%	8.12%	7.74%	4.13%	3.97%	6.67%	10.67%	3.38%	2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LVHI and FGDL in my portfolio?

LVHI and FGDL 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, LVHI or FGDL?

FGDL has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to LVHI (3.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LVHI dropped -32.31% vs FGDL's -19.23%.

Which ETF is better, LVHI or FGDL?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 31.32% vs 20.91% for LVHI. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LVHI has been the lower-risk option at 3.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LVHI or FGDL?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 31.32% return vs 20.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LVHI or FGDL?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for LVHI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LVHI or FGDL?

LVHI has the higher dividend yield at 4.50%, compared with 0.00% for FGDL.

What is the main difference between LVHI and FGDL?

LVHI is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while FGDL is Precious Metals. LVHI tracks QS International Low Volatility High Dividend Hedged Index, while FGDL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Their fees differ too: 0.40% for LVHI and 0.15% for FGDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LVHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 1.19), 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.