GLDM vs IAU Stock Comparison: AI Score, Valuation, Performance and Upside
GLDM and IAU are both physically-backed gold ETFs designed to track the spot gold price, differing primarily in expense ratio (GLDM at 0.10% vs IAU at 0.25%), liquidity (IAU is more liquid), and fund manager (State Street vs BlackRock). For long-term investors, GLDM's lower expense ratio provides a slight cost advantage, while IAU's higher liquidity is more important for large institutional traders.
GLDM vs IAU is the key cost-vs-liquidity comparison among low-cost physical gold ETFs — GLDM's lowest-in-class expense ratio versus IAU's superior trading liquidity and BlackRock brand.
GLDM holds the edge across 3 of 5 key metrics in this comparison. GLDM has delivered stronger 1-year price return (-1.46% vs -1.64% for IAU).
- Want the lowest-cost gold ETF for a long-term buy-and-hold gold allocation where total cost minimization matters most
- Value SPDR's gold ETF heritage and State Street's established track record in physically-backed precious metals funds
- Are making smaller-to-medium gold purchases where GLDM's lower price per share is more accessible
- Want the highest-liquidity physically-backed gold ETF for ease of entry and exit, particularly for larger position sizes
- Value BlackRock's iShares brand and the trust associated with the world's largest ETF provider
- Are comfortable with a 0.25% expense ratio in exchange for the liquidity and brand recognition of IAU
| Metric | GLDM | IAU |
|---|---|---|
| ETF scorei | 26.0 | 26.8 |
| Latest closei | $78.03 | $74.15 |
| 1M returni | -4.90% | -4.87% |
| 3M returni | -2.63% | -2.68% |
| 6M returni | -12.70% | -12.73% |
| 1Y returni | -1.46% | -1.64% |
The ETF score weights long-term returns and risk-adjusted performance most heavily, but still rewards low expense ratios, larger fund size, and broader diversification — so it can favor low-cost, broad, mega-cap funds over smaller thematic or actively-managed funds even when the latter have delivered stronger returns.
How much would $10,000 be worth today if invested at the start of each period, with all dividends reinvested?
| Period | GLDM | IAU |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y ago | $9.83K (-1.7%) started 2025-11-03 | $9.82K (-1.8%) started 2025-11-03 |
| 5Y ago | $22.14K (+121.4%) started 2021-11-03 | $21.97K (+119.7%) started 2021-11-03 |
| 10Y ago | $30.99K (+209.9%) started 2018-06-26 | $29.54K (+195.4%) started 2016-11-03 |
Hypothetical — past performance does not guarantee future results.
| Metric | GLDM | IAU |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratioi | 0.10% | 0.25% |
| Total assets (AUM)i | $30.71B | $62.22B |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Trailing P/Ei | N/A | N/A |
| Betai | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| 52-week change | -1.46% | -1.64% |
| Metric | GLDM | IAU |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y returni | -1.46% | -1.64% |
| 6M returni | -12.70% | -12.73% |
| 3M returni | -2.63% | -2.68% |
| 1M returni | -4.90% | -4.87% |
| 1Y Sharpe ratio | -0.07 | -0.08 |
| Betai | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 5Y CAGR | +17.24% | +17.06% |
Over the past year, GLDM and IAU have moved strongly in the same direction (correlation of 1.00), based on daily returns.
Lower drawdown and smaller single-period drops generally indicate a smoother ride, though they do not guarantee lower future risk.
| Period | Metric | GLDM | IAU |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y | Growthi | -1.69% | -1.84% |
| CAGRi | -1.69% | -1.85% | |
| Volatilityi | 28.46% | 28.46% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | -0.07 | -0.08 | |
| Sortino ratioi | -0.10 | -0.11 | |
| Max drawdowni | 28.04% | 28.21% | |
| Current drawdowni | 26.92% | 27.00% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 13.27% | 13.32% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 16.02% | 16.08% | |
| Max daily dropi | 10.08% | 10.21% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 12.26% | 12.24% | |
| 5Y | Growthi | +121.42% | +119.70% |
| CAGRi | +17.24% | +17.06% | |
| Volatilityi | 18.97% | 19.00% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.70 | 0.69 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.98 | 0.97 | |
| Max drawdowni | 28.04% | 28.21% | |
| Current drawdowni | 26.92% | 27.00% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 6.91% | 6.95% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 9.69% | 9.73% | |
| Max daily dropi | 10.08% | 10.21% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 12.26% | 12.24% | |
| 10Y | Growthi | +209.94% | +195.42% |
| CAGRi | +14.50% | +11.45% | |
| Volatilityi | 17.36% | 16.44% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.61 | 0.47 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.85 | 0.65 | |
| Max drawdowni | 28.04% | 28.21% | |
| Current drawdowni | 26.92% | 27.00% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 7.00% | 7.15% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 9.41% | 9.25% | |
| Max daily dropi | 10.08% | 10.21% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 12.26% | 12.24% |
| Category | GLDM | IAU |
|---|---|---|
| Fund name | SPDR Gold MiniShares | iShares Gold Trust |
| Type | ETF | ETF |
| Expense ratioi | 0.10% | 0.25% |
| Total assets (AUM)i | $30.71B | $62.22B |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.00% | 0.00% |
- Lowest expense ratio among major gold ETFs at 0.10% annually — significantly lower than GLD (0.40%) and slightly lower than IAU (0.25%)
- SPDR/State Street brand credibility and proven track record in the gold ETF market through its GLD franchise
- Lower price per share than GLD makes it accessible for smaller investors and those building fractional gold positions
- iShares (BlackRock) brand is the leading ETF provider globally — institutional investors often default to BlackRock products for established trust
- Very high liquidity — IAU is consistently among the most actively traded gold ETFs, making it easy to enter and exit positions of any size
- Multiple vault locations across three countries provide geographic diversification for physical gold holdings
- Very small differences in expense ratios matter over long holding periods — GLDM's 0.10% vs IAU's 0.25% means less than $1.50 per year per $1,000 invested
- Physical gold ETF performance is essentially identical to spot gold price minus the expense ratio — there is no operational differentiation between physically-backed gold ETFs
- Liquidity (trading volume) for GLDM is lower than IAU and much lower than GLD — which can matter for institutional investors placing large orders
- IAU's 0.25% expense ratio is competitive but now sits between GLDM's 0.10% and GLD's 0.40% — long-term cost-sensitive investors may prefer GLDM
- Physical gold ETF performance is essentially identical between IAU and GLDM — the only material differentiation is expense ratio and liquidity
- Tax treatment for gold ETFs may differ from equity ETF treatment depending on jurisdiction — investors should consult tax advisors on collectibles treatment
Compare more than two at a time
This page is a fixed writeup on GLDM and IAU. Our comparison engine is the interactive version: load up to five tickers, switch timeframes, and get the correlation, drawdown, and overlap analysis that a static page can't show.
Add three more names beside GLDM and IAU, mixing stocks and ETFs in the same table — useful when the real question is which of a whole peer group to own.
AI score, forward P/E, analyst target upside, operating margin, and revenue growth are scored head-to-head, with a running tally of which ticker leads on how many metrics.
Volatility, Sharpe and Sortino ratios, maximum, current, and average drawdown, Ulcer Index, and worst single-day and single-week drops across every timeframe.
Pairwise daily-return correlation for every combination, so you can see whether two holdings actually diversify each other or just move together.
A scatter plot of forward P/E against return on equity, plus drawdown and 30-day rolling volatility charts, to separate what is cheap from what is merely beaten down.
For ETFs, a top-holdings comparison that exposes hidden overlap between funds. Every comparison exports to CSV for your own spreadsheet work.
Two comparisons a week are free without an account. A 14-day trial removes the limit and adds AI price forecasts, stock rankings, saved watchlists, and the intrinsic value calculator — no credit card required.
Want deeper AI forecasts?
This comparison page is public and free forever. Subscribers can unlock saved watchlists, full AI rankings, detailed forecasts, and interactive analysis tools.