PHYS.TO vs. SETM

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) and Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM).

SETM is a passively managed fund by Sprott that tracks the performance of the Nasdaq Sprott Energy Transition Materials Select Index - AUD - Benchmark TR Gross. It was launched on Feb 1, 2023.

Performance

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) and Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PHYS.TO Sprott Physical Gold Trust	9.00%	56.35%	37.41%	6.95%
SETM Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF	15.81%	86.32%	-5.79%	-11.51%

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PHYS.TO achieves a 9.00% return, which is significantly lower than SETM's 15.81% return.

PHYS.TO

• 1D: 3.83%
• 1M: -9.76%
• YTD: 9.00%
• 6M: 19.82%
• 1Y: 42.70%
• 3Y*: 33.20%
• 5Y*: 23.79%
• 10Y*: —

SETM

• 1D: 5.70%
• 1M: -12.68%
• YTD: 15.81%
• 6M: 33.58%
• 1Y: 130.05%
• 3Y*: 27.61%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

Return for Risk

PHYS.TO vs. SETM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PHYS.TO

PHYS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 84
PHYS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
PHYS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
PHYS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 83
PHYS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PHYS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 87

SETM

SETM Risk / Return Rank: 96
SETM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
SETM Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
SETM Omega Ratio Rank: 94
SETM Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SETM Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) and Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM). 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.

	PHYS.TO	SETM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	2.95	-1.36
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	3.14	-1.14
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.43	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	5.00	-2.54
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.74	16.49	-7.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PHYS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is lower than the SETM Sharpe Ratio of 2.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PHYS.TO and SETM, 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

	PHYS.TO	SETM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.60	2.95	-1.36
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.42	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.64	0.60	+0.04

Correlation

The correlation between PHYS.TO and SETM is 0.27, 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.

Dividends

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Dividend Comparison

PHYS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SETM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
PHYS.TO Sprott Physical Gold Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SETM Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF	1.37%	1.56%	2.07%	2.47%

Drawdowns

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PHYS.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.08%, smaller than the maximum SETM drawdown of -40.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PHYS.TO and SETM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PHYS.TO	SETM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.08%	-42.81%	+15.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.14%	-25.85%	+7.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.31%	-16.74%	+5.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.72%	-14.59%	+6.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.12%	7.67%	-2.55%

Volatility

PHYS.TO vs. SETM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) is 10.99%, while Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM) has a volatility of 18.06%. This indicates that PHYS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SETM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PHYS.TO	SETM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.99%	18.06%	-7.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.94%	35.89%	-11.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.89%	44.36%	-17.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.92%	34.11%	-17.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.95%	34.11%	-7.16%