VALT.TO vs. GLDM

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

VALT.TO (CI Gold Bullion ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both Gold funds - VALT.TO tracks the No Index (Physical Commodity) while GLDM tracks the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, VALT.TO returned 16.17%/yr vs 20.22%/yr for GLDM. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VALT.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VALT.TO achieves a -6.93% return, which is significantly lower than GLDM's -3.34% return.

VALT.TO

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 1.59%
• 6M: -19.64%
• YTD: -6.93%
• 1Y: 17.76%
• 3Y*: 25.22%
• 5Y*: 16.17%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.95%

GLDM

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 0.81%
• 6M: -16.86%
• YTD: -3.34%
• 1Y: 24.52%
• 3Y*: 30.08%
• 5Y*: 20.22%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.24%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	CA$315.22M	CA$369.41M	CA$457.12M
VALT.TO CI Gold Bullion ETF	CA$185.75K	CA$223.40K	CA$363.49K

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
VALT.TO CI Gold Bullion ETF	-6.93%	60.46%	25.58%	12.35%	0.92%	-3.19%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	-3.34%	56.71%	37.84%	10.35%	5.84%	-0.98%

Correlation

The correlation between VALT.TO and GLDM is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2021	0.68

Over the past year, VALT.TO and GLDM have become more correlated (0.93) than their long-term average of 0.68, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

VALT.TO vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

VALT.TO

VALT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 25
VALT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
VALT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
VALT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 29
VALT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
VALT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 28
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 33
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	VALT.TO	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.63	0.89	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.97	1.25	-0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.18	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.66	1.04	-0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.48	2.37	-0.88

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VALT.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.63, which is comparable to the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VALT.TO 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.

Drawdowns

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VALT.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.07%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -23.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VALT.TO and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	VALT.TO	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.07%	-23.62%	-3.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.07%	-23.62%	-3.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.07%	-23.62%	-3.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.07%	-23.62%	-3.45%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.75%	-21.89%	-3.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.25%	-7.35%	+1.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.03%	10.39%	+1.64%

Volatility

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) have volatilities of 6.20% and 6.40%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VALT.TO	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.20%	6.40%	-0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.23%	23.69%	+0.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.23%	27.81%	+0.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.62%	19.30%	-0.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.21%	18.24%	-0.03%

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

VALT.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

VALT.TO vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

Neither VALT.TO nor GLDM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VALT.TO and GLDM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, VALT.TO and GLDM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, VALT.TO or GLDM?

On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, VALT.TO or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for VALT.TO.

What is the main difference between VALT.TO and GLDM?

VALT.TO tracks No Index (Physical Commodity), while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: CI Global Asset Management and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for VALT.TO and 0.10% for GLDM.