XCNY vs. GLDM
Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM).
XCNY and GLDM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XCNY is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the S&P Emerging ex-China BMI. It was launched on Sep 4, 2024. GLDM is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the LBMA Gold PM Price. It was launched on Jun 25, 2018. Both XCNY and GLDM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
XCNY vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
XCNY vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF | 2.91% | 20.42% | -3.51% |
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | 10.46% | 64.20% | 4.33% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCNY achieves a 2.91% return, which is significantly lower than GLDM's 10.46% return.
XCNY
- 1D
- 0.45%
- 1M
- -5.62%
- YTD
- 2.91%
- 6M
- 7.19%
- 1Y
- 27.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLDM
- 1D
- 1.74%
- 1M
- -10.65%
- YTD
- 10.46%
- 6M
- 23.17%
- 1Y
- 52.61%
- 3Y*
- 34.09%
- 5Y*
- 22.33%
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
XCNY vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCNY has a 0.15% 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%.
Return for Risk
XCNY vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank
XCNY
GLDM
XCNY vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) 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.
| XCNY | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.46 | 1.92 | -0.46 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.12 | 2.35 | -0.23 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.35 | -0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.32 | 2.74 | -0.41 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.97 | 10.04 | -1.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XCNY | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.46 | 1.92 | -0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.27 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.71 | 1.11 | -0.40 |
Correlation
The correlation between XCNY and GLDM is 0.28, 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
XCNY vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison
XCNY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF | 2.61% | 2.68% | 1.07% |
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
XCNY vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCNY drawdown since its inception was -19.70%, smaller than the maximum GLDM drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNY and GLDM.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCNY | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.70% | -21.63% | +1.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.86% | -19.14% | +7.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.92% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.34% | -11.68% | +3.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.39% | -6.05% | +1.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.07% | 5.22% | -2.15% |
Volatility
XCNY vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) is 8.18%, while SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) has a volatility of 10.44%. This indicates that XCNY 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.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| XCNY | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.18% | 10.44% | -2.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.38% | 24.12% | -11.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.81% | 27.58% | -8.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.12% | 17.65% | -0.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.12% | 16.78% | +0.34% |