XMEM.L vs. GLD

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMEM.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and GLD (SPDR Gold Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - XMEM.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while GLD is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMEM.L returned 10.73%/yr vs 13.96%/yr for GLD. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMEM.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GLD.

Performance

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XMEM.L is traded in GBp, while GLD is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GLD values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMEM.L achieves a 25.99% return, which is significantly higher than GLD's 3.30% return. Over the past 10 years, XMEM.L has underperformed GLD with an annualized return of 10.73%, while GLD has yielded a comparatively higher 13.96% annualized return.

XMEM.L

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: 6.19%
• YTD: 25.99%
• 6M: 27.99%
• 1Y: 53.69%
• 3Y*: 20.58%
• 5Y*: 8.31%
• 10Y*: 10.73%

GLD

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -1.63%
• YTD: 3.30%
• 6M: 4.59%
• 1Y: 32.41%
• 3Y*: 27.53%
• 5Y*: 19.42%
• 10Y*: 13.96%

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

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XMEM.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C	25.99%	24.74%	8.98%	2.98%	-10.70%	-2.06%	13.72%	13.41%	-9.64%	25.10%
GLD SPDR Gold Shares	4.20%	52.02%	28.87%	7.06%	11.03%	-3.24%	21.15%	13.37%	3.87%	3.05%

Correlation

The correlation between XMEM.L and GLD is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2007	0.11

The correlation between XMEM.L and GLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.11 (all time) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMEM.L	GLD
Technology	36.9%	-
Financial Services	19.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	-
Industrials	7.5%	-
Communication Services	6.9%	-
Basic Materials	6.6%	100.0%
Energy	4.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	-
Healthcare	2.9%	-
Utilities	2.1%	-
Real Estate	1.0%	-

Return for Risk

XMEM.L vs. GLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMEM.L

XMEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 89
XMEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
XMEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
XMEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XMEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XMEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

GLD

GLD Risk / Return Rank: 34
GLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GLD Omega Ratio Rank: 38
GLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
GLD 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.

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD). 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.

	XMEM.L	GLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.14	1.29	+1.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.04	1.70	+2.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.26	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.87	1.83	+3.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.24	4.53	+12.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is higher than the GLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMEM.L and GLD, 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

	XMEM.L	GLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14	1.29	+1.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54	1.17	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	0.86	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.70	-0.41

Drawdowns

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMEM.L drawdown since its inception was -54.53%, which is greater than GLD's maximum drawdown of -41.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMEM.L and GLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMEM.L	GLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.53%	-41.89%	-12.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.96%	-17.78%	+6.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.33%	-17.78%	+2.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.94%	-17.78%	-6.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.58%	-22.78%	-4.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-16.88%	+14.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.73%	-13.21%	+1.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	7.18%	-4.08%

Volatility

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) at 4.79%. This indicates that XMEM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMEM.L	GLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.37%	4.79%	+2.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.54%	21.78%	-7.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.04%	25.30%	-8.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	16.71%	+0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.31%	16.23%	+2.08%

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMEM.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than GLD's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMEM.L vs. GLD - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMEM.L nor GLD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMEM.L and GLD in my portfolio?

XMEM.L and GLD have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XMEM.L or GLD?

On fees, GLD is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMEM.L or GLD?

GLD is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for XMEM.L.

What is the main difference between XMEM.L and GLD?

XMEM.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while GLD is Gold. XMEM.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while GLD tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for XMEM.L and 0.40% for GLD.