NAMM vs. GLD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

NAMM (Namib Minerals) is a stock, while GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Over the past year, NAMM returned -87.17% vs 21.29% for GLD. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

NAMM vs. GLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Namib Minerals (NAMM) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NAMM achieves a 81.19% return, which is significantly higher than GLD's -4.79% return.

NAMM

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 27.97%
• YTD: 81.19%
• 6M: 75.96%
• 1Y: -87.17%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GLD

• 1D: -1.89%
• 1M: -8.82%
• YTD: -4.79%
• 6M: -8.78%
• 1Y: 21.29%
• 3Y*: 28.41%
• 5Y*: 17.84%
• 10Y*: 11.59%

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

NAMM vs. GLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NAMM Namib Minerals	81.19%	-94.13%
GLD SPDR Gold Shares	-4.79%	28.12%

Correlation

The correlation between NAMM and GLD is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2025	0.24

Return for Risk

NAMM vs. GLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

NAMM

NAMM Risk / Return Rank: 20
NAMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
NAMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
NAMM Omega Ratio Rank: 26
NAMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
NAMM Martin Ratio Rank: 19

GLD

GLD Risk / Return Rank: 22
GLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
GLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
GLD Omega Ratio Rank: 24
GLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
GLD Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

NAMM vs. GLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Namib Minerals (NAMM) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). 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.

	NAMM	GLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.40	0.78	-1.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.30	1.13	-1.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.17	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.93	0.87	-1.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.09	2.35	-3.44

NAMM vs. GLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NAMM Sharpe Ratio is -0.40, which is lower than the GLD Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NAMM and GLD, 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

NAMM vs. GLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NAMM drawdown since its inception was -97.05%, which is greater than GLD's maximum drawdown of -45.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NAMM and GLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	NAMM	GLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.05%	-45.56%	-51.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-93.36%	-24.46%	-68.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.46%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.14%	-23.91%	-70.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-88.55%	-16.17%	-72.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	80.65%	9.10%	+71.55%

Volatility

NAMM vs. GLD - Volatility Comparison

Namib Minerals (NAMM) has a higher volatility of 41.49% compared to SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) at 8.18%. This indicates that NAMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NAMM	GLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	41.49%	8.18%	+33.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	148.15%	24.38%	+123.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	216.35%	27.57%	+188.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	229.33%	18.24%	+211.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	229.33%	16.04%	+213.29%

Dividends

NAMM vs. GLD - Dividend Comparison

Neither NAMM nor GLD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NAMM and GLD in my portfolio?

NAMM and GLD have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NAMM or GLD?

NAMM has higher volatility (41.49%) compared to GLD (8.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NAMM dropped -97.05% vs GLD's -45.56%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.78 vs -0.40), 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.