PA=F vs. GC=F

Last updated Apr 3, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Palladium (PA=F) and Gold (GC=F).

Performance

PA=F vs. GC=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Palladium (PA=F) and Gold (GC=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

PA=F vs. GC=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PA=F Palladium	-7.01%	79.07%	-17.98%	-38.30%	-5.52%	-22.50%	28.42%	59.67%	13.49%	54.27%
GC=F Gold	8.72%	64.52%	27.48%	13.34%	-0.43%	-3.47%	24.59%	18.87%	-2.14%	13.59%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PA=F achieves a -7.01% return, which is significantly lower than GC=F's 8.72% return. Over the past 10 years, PA=F has underperformed GC=F with an annualized return of 10.62%, while GC=F has yielded a comparatively higher 14.46% annualized return.

PA=F

• 1D: 2.48%
• 1M: -7.34%
• YTD: -7.01%
• 6M: 20.30%
• 1Y: 53.76%
• 3Y*: 1.29%
• 5Y*: -10.71%
• 10Y*: 10.62%

GC=F

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -7.92%
• YTD: 8.72%
• 6M: 22.48%
• 1Y: 49.77%
• 3Y*: 33.33%
• 5Y*: 22.19%
• 10Y*: 14.46%

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

Return for Risk

PA=F vs. GC=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

PA=F

PA=F Risk / Return Rank: 25
PA=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
PA=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
PA=F Omega Ratio Rank: 28
PA=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
PA=F Martin Ratio Rank: 16

GC=F

GC=F Risk / Return Rank: 82
GC=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
GC=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GC=F Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GC=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
GC=F Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

PA=F vs. GC=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Palladium (PA=F) and Gold (GC=F). 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.

	PA=F	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	1.72	-0.83
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.33	2.13	-0.80
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.32	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	2.64	-1.41
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.35	9.67	-6.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PA=F vs. GC=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PA=F Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the GC=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PA=F and GC=F, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PA=F	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89	1.72	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.22	1.23	-1.45
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.25	0.88	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.64	-0.43

Correlation

The correlation between PA=F and GC=F is 0.37, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Drawdowns

PA=F vs. GC=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PA=F drawdown since its inception was -74.88%, which is greater than GC=F's maximum drawdown of -44.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PA=F and GC=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	PA=F	GC=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-74.88%	-44.36%	-30.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.19%	-17.73%	-20.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-74.88%	-20.43%	-54.45%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.88%	-20.87%	-54.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-53.94%	-11.58%	-42.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.67%	-13.03%	-13.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.02%	4.83%	+9.19%

Volatility

PA=F vs. GC=F - Volatility Comparison

Palladium (PA=F) has a higher volatility of 13.67% compared to Gold (GC=F) at 11.34%. This indicates that PA=F's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GC=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PA=F	GC=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.67%	11.34%	+2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	46.40%	24.65%	+21.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.53%	27.83%	+23.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.63%	17.97%	+25.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.42%	16.37%	+21.05%