SPPP vs. FGDL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SPPP (Sprott Physical Platinum and Palladium Trust) and FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) are both Precious Metals funds. SPPP is actively managed, while FGDL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SPPP returned 5.59%/yr vs 31.32%/yr for FGDL. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SPPP charges 1.02%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FGDL.

Performance

SPPP vs. FGDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Physical Platinum and Palladium Trust (SPPP) 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, SPPP achieves a -14.37% return, which is significantly lower than FGDL's 2.43% return.

SPPP

• 1D: -4.12%
• 1M: -6.42%
• YTD: -14.37%
• 6M: -2.30%
• 1Y: 39.19%
• 3Y*: 5.59%
• 5Y*: -6.33%
• 10Y*: 8.53%

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)

SPPP vs. FGDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SPPP Sprott Physical Platinum and Palladium Trust	-14.37%	89.43%	-11.89%	-25.86%	2.95%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	2.43%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between SPPP and FGDL is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022	0.54

The correlation between SPPP and FGDL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SPPP vs. FGDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPPP

SPPP Risk / Return Rank: 22
SPPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
SPPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
SPPP Omega Ratio Rank: 25
SPPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
SPPP Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

SPPP vs. FGDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Physical Platinum and Palladium Trust (SPPP) 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.

	SPPP	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.77	1.19	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.23	1.57	-0.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.24	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.05	1.66	-0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.23	4.03	-1.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SPPP vs. FGDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPPP Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is lower than the FGDL Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPPP 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

	SPPP	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77	1.19	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.26	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.09	1.35	-1.26

Drawdowns

SPPP vs. FGDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPPP drawdown since its inception was -59.09%, which is greater than FGDL's maximum drawdown of -19.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPPP and FGDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPPP	FGDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.09%	-19.23%	-39.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.42%	-19.23%	-18.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.42%	-19.23%	-18.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-58.50%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-59.09%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.14%	-18.16%	-17.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.48%	-3.83%	-22.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.60%	7.88%	+9.72%

Volatility

SPPP vs. FGDL - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Physical Platinum and Palladium Trust (SPPP) has a higher volatility of 10.71% compared to Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) at 5.61%. This indicates that SPPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FGDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPPP	FGDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.71%	5.61%	+5.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.53%	23.18%	+22.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.97%	26.78%	+24.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.89%	19.03%	+15.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.10%	19.03%	+14.07%

SPPP vs. FGDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPPP has a 1.02% expense ratio, which is higher than FGDL's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

SPPP vs. FGDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither SPPP nor FGDL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPPP and FGDL in my portfolio?

SPPP and FGDL have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SPPP or FGDL?

SPPP has higher volatility (10.71%) compared to FGDL (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPPP dropped -59.09% vs FGDL's -19.23%.

Which ETF is better, SPPP or FGDL?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 31.32% vs 5.59% for SPPP. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FGDL has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SPPP or FGDL?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 31.32% return vs 5.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPPP or FGDL?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for SPPP.

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

SPPP and FGDL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between SPPP and FGDL?

They also come from different issuers: Sprott and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 1.02% for SPPP and 0.15% for FGDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FGDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 0.77), 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.