Skip to content
etf.net

CTWO vs GLTR

COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust

CTWO—NYSE Arca

abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF

GLTRBNYSE Arca

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

GLTR −0.19pt a year

CTWO0.79%GLTR0.60%

Avg volume · 30D

GLTR 68.7×the volume

CTWO889GLTR61.1K

CTWO vs GLTR Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+8.3%CTWO−3.7%GLTR

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. CTWO +8.3%. GLTR −3.7%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.20%40%60%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
CTWO 0.79%
GLTR 0.60%, better
Fund size
CTWO $2M
GLTR $2.32B
1Y total return
CTWO +8.3%, better
GLTR −3.7%
Holdings
CTWO 2
GLTR 1
Avg volume (30D)
CTWO 889 sh
GLTR 61.1K sh, better
NAV per share
CTWO $19.60
GLTR $167.14
52W range

ETF.net Grade

  • —CTWOUnder classification review
GLTR: Cost 41, Risk 62, Mission 92, Tradability 57, Holdings not scored, Durability 69.
Pillar letters and Scores for CTWO, GLTR, with each pillar’s weight
PillarCTWOGLTR
Cost30% weightNot scoredC41
Mission25% weightNot scoredA92
Risk15% weightNot scoredB62
Tradability15% weightNot scoredB57
Holdings10% weightNot scoredNot scored
Durability5% weightNot scoredB69

Rank among Physical Commodities funds

How we build Categories ›

Physical Commodities⁠

Category · 9 funds
See all 9 ›

GLTR ranks 4th of 9 funds in the Physical Commodities Category.

  1. Rank 1ASIVRabrdn Physical Silver Shares ETFScore 74
  2. Rank 2BSLViShares Silver TrustScore 69
  3. Rank 3BPLTMGraniteShares Platinum TrustScore 65
  4. Rank 4BGLTRabrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETFScore 63
  5. Rank 5BPPLTabrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETFScore 59
  6. CTWONot yet graded

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

CTWO—COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust

GLTRBabrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF

In short

CTWO No data

GLTR Gold, silver, platinum and palladium in one wrapper, all held as physical bullion. GLTR is the rare one-ticker version of the entire precious-metals complex, running since 2010, and it owns the metal instead of renting exposure through futures.

Stated mandate

CTWO No data

GLTR The Trust holds a physical bullion basket containing gold, silver, platinum, and palladium in specified proportions, with baskets issued against bullion deposits and bullion distributed on redemptions.

Why people hold it

CTWO No data

  • GLTR Four metals, one ticker: the trust holds physical gold, silver, platinum and palladium in set proportions, with baskets created and redeemed in bullion rather than cash.aberdeeninvestments.com
  • Trading since 2010 and now a multi-billion-dollar trust: one of the longest-standing ways to own the full metals basket inside a brokerage account.
  • Because it holds bullion outright, its results have tracked the underlying metals basket closely, less expenses, among the tighter records in the physical-commodity group.
  • The 0.60% fee sits right at the median for physically backed commodity funds, so the four-metal convenience is not priced above the category norm.

Worth knowing

CTWO No data

  • GLTR Single-metal siblings cost less: SIVR charges 0.30% and SLV 0.50%. Bundling four metals into one line item costs a little more than buying one.
  • The proportions are set by the trust, and platinum and palladium bring industrial demand swings a gold-only holding does not. You cannot dial the mix yourself.
  • No income here. It is a grantor trust holding metal, pays no distributions, and volume is moderate rather than heavy, so spreads deserve a glance.

Full CTWO profile⁠

Full GLTR profile⁠

CTWO vs GLTR Holdings

How CTWO and GLTR differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Shared holdings make up 0.0% of CTWO and 0.0% of GLTR.

Level by level

  • Asset classCommodities, Alternatives0.0%
  • Holdings0 in both0.0%

Sector

No Sector split for CTWO and GLTR.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

No country split for CTWO and GLTR.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • CTWO100.0%
  • GLTR100.0%

Securities held

  • CTWO1
  • GLTR1

Asset class

CTWO
Commodities
GLTR
Alternatives

Holdings

  • Only in CTWO1
  • In both0
  • Only in GLTR1

Only in CTWO

1 security, 0.9% of CTWO by weight

  • SSC Government Money Market0.87%

Only in GLTR

1 security, 100% of GLTR by weight

  • Physical Precious Metals Basket100.00%

Weight gaps

CTWO and GLTR share no securities.

All 2 CTWO holdings⁠All GLTR holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

CTWO vs GLTR Cost

Overpaying CTWO vs GLTR

$3,357

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • CTWO 0.79%

    $15,174

  • GLTR 0.60%

    $11,817

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • CTWO 0.79%
  • GLTR 0.60%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530CTWO $15,174GLTR $11,817

Year by year

YearCTWOGLTROverpaying
10$1,405$1,076$329
20$5,331$4,116$1,215
30$15,174$11,817$3,357

Expense ratio

  • 0.79%CTWO
  • 0.60%GLTR, cheaper
  • Middle half of Physical Commodities funds
  • Median 0.60%

GLTR 5th cheapest of 9 funds

CTWO 9th cheapest of 9 funds

CTWO vs GLTR Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
CTWO None
GLTR None

Distribution history

CTWOAll CTWO payments⁠

No distribution history available.

GLTRAll GLTR payments⁠

No distribution history available.

CTWO vs GLTR Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
CTWO 23.6%since Jul 2025GLTR 24.1%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
CTWO 0.54since Jul 2025GLTR 0.82
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
CTWO −30.1%since Jun 2025GLTR −41.9%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
CTWO 1.28GLTR 0.68

CTWO and GLTR in the news

All news⁠

Popular comparisons

  • CTWO—vsSIVRA

    COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust · abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.30%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • GLTRBvsSIVRA

    abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF · abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.60% · 0.30%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • CTWO—vsSLVB

    COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust · iShares Silver Trust

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • GLTRBvsSLVB

    abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF · iShares Silver Trust

    Expense ratio
    0.60% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • CTWO—vsPLTMB

    COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust · GraniteShares Platinum Trust

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • GLTRBvsPLTMB

    abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF · GraniteShares Platinum Trust

    Expense ratio
    0.60% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.