TCAF vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

TCAF (T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - TCAF is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by T. Rowe Price, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. TCAF is actively managed, while GLDM is passively managed. Over the past year, TCAF returned 17.40% vs 30.55% for GLDM. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TCAF charges 0.31%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

TCAF vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF (TCAF) 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, TCAF achieves a 4.53% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's 0.30% return.

TCAF

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -0.52%
• YTD: 4.53%
• 6M: 5.02%
• 1Y: 17.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GLDM

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -8.41%
• YTD: 0.30%
• 6M: 3.19%
• 1Y: 30.55%
• 3Y*: 30.08%
• 5Y*: 17.89%
• 10Y*: —

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

TCAF vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TCAF T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF	4.53%	15.45%	20.93%	8.40%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.30%	64.20%	27.08%	5.25%

Correlation

The correlation between TCAF and GLDM is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2023	0.17

TCAF vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TCAF	GLDM
Technology	33.7%	-
Healthcare	17.3%	-
Communication Services	11.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	-
Utilities	8.6%	-
Financial Services	6.0%	-
Industrials	4.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	-
Energy	2.6%	-
Basic Materials	0.1%	100.0%
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

TCAF vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

TCAF

TCAF Risk / Return Rank: 44
TCAF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
TCAF Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
TCAF Omega Ratio Rank: 47
TCAF Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
TCAF Martin Ratio Rank: 42

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 34
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
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.

TCAF vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF (TCAF) 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.

	TCAF	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	1.15	+0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	1.54	+0.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.23	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.54	1.53	+0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.15	3.85	+2.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TCAF vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TCAF Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TCAF 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

	TCAF	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.50	1.15	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.00	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.20	0.99	+0.21

Drawdowns

TCAF vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TCAF drawdown since its inception was -16.37%, smaller than the maximum GLDM drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TCAF and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TCAF	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.37%	-21.63%	+5.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.33%	-20.00%	+8.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.00%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.82%	-19.80%	+16.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.06%	-6.24%	+4.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	7.96%	-5.13%

Volatility

TCAF vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF (TCAF) is 3.25%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 5.65%. This indicates that TCAF 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

	TCAF	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.25%	5.65%	-2.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.05%	23.31%	-14.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.68%	26.65%	-14.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.98%	17.98%	-4.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.98%	16.89%	-2.91%

TCAF vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

TCAF has a 0.31% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

TCAF vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

TCAF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.48%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TCAF T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF	0.48%	0.50%	0.43%	0.26%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TCAF and GLDM in my portfolio?

TCAF and GLDM have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TCAF or GLDM?

GLDM has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to TCAF (3.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TCAF dropped -16.37% vs GLDM's -21.63%.

Which ETF is better, TCAF or GLDM?

On 1-year performance, GLDM leads with 30.55% vs 17.40% for TCAF. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, TCAF has been the lower-risk option at 3.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TCAF or GLDM?

Over the 1-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 30.55% return vs 17.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TCAF or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.31% for TCAF.

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

TCAF has the higher dividend yield at 0.48%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

What is the main difference between TCAF and GLDM?

TCAF is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GLDM is Gold. They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.31% for TCAF and 0.10% for GLDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TCAF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.50 vs 1.15), 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.