NZUS vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NZUS (SPDR MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - NZUS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned Index, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NZUS returned 20.11%/yr vs 31.49%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.10% expense ratio.

Performance

NZUS vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZUS) 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, NZUS achieves a 5.51% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's 3.00% return.

NZUS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 2.81%
• YTD: 5.51%
• 6M: 5.42%
• 1Y: 20.11%
• 3Y*: 20.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GLDM

• 1D: -0.96%
• 1M: -1.62%
• YTD: 3.00%
• 6M: 5.60%
• 1Y: 32.42%
• 3Y*: 31.49%
• 5Y*: 18.49%
• 10Y*: —

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

NZUS vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
NZUS SPDR MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned ETF	5.51%	13.95%	24.34%	29.16%	-14.34%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	3.00%	64.20%	27.08%	13.04%	-7.94%

Correlation

The correlation between NZUS and GLDM is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2022	0.15

NZUS vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NZUS	GLDM
Technology	45.3%	-
Financial Services	11.9%	-
Real Estate	10.5%	-
Communication Services	9.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	-
Healthcare	7.8%	-
Industrials	2.1%	-
Utilities	1.6%	-
Energy	0.8%	-
Basic Materials	0.5%	100.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-

Return for Risk

NZUS vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

NZUS

NZUS Risk / Return Rank: 47
NZUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
NZUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
NZUS Omega Ratio Rank: 51
NZUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
NZUS Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

NZUS vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZUS) 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.

	NZUS	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	1.24	+0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	1.63	+0.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.25	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.85	1.70	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.83	4.23	+2.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NZUS vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NZUS Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is higher than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NZUS 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

	NZUS	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.75	1.24	+0.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.04	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.71	1.02	-0.31

Drawdowns

NZUS vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NZUS drawdown since its inception was -20.99%, roughly equal to the maximum GLDM drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NZUS and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	NZUS	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.99%	-21.63%	+0.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.43%	-19.14%	+6.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.99%	-19.14%	-1.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-17.65%	+17.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.82%	-6.22%	+1.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.36%	7.69%	-4.33%

Volatility

NZUS vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZUS) is 2.83%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 5.47%. This indicates that NZUS 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

	NZUS	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.83%	5.47%	-2.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.09%	22.99%	-12.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.27%	26.39%	-13.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.61%	17.91%	+0.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.61%	16.85%	+1.76%

NZUS vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NZUS and GLDM have an expense ratio of 0.10%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

NZUS vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

NZUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NZUS SPDR MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned ETF	0.60%	0.89%	5.49%	1.07%	1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NZUS and GLDM in my portfolio?

NZUS and GLDM have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NZUS or GLDM?

GLDM has higher volatility (5.47%) compared to NZUS (2.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NZUS dropped -20.99% vs GLDM's -21.63%.

Which ETF is better, NZUS or GLDM?

On 3-year performance, GLDM leads with 31.49% vs 20.11% for NZUS. Both ETFs have the same 0.10% expense ratio. On volatility, NZUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NZUS or GLDM?

Over the 3-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 31.49% return vs 20.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NZUS or GLDM?

NZUS and GLDM have the same expense ratio: 0.10% per year.

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

NZUS has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

What is the main difference between NZUS and GLDM?

NZUS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while GLDM is Gold. NZUS tracks MSCI USA Climate Paris Aligned Index, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NZUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.24), 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.