Skip to content

FGDL vs IAUM

Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF

FGDLBNYSE Arca

iShares Gold Trust Micro

IAUMANYSE Arca

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

IAUM −0.06pt a year

FGDL 0.15%IAUM 0.09%

Avg volume · 30D

IAUM 139.8×the volume

FGDL 18.4KIAUM 2.58M

3Y return · a year

IAUM +0.1pt

FGDL +29.1%IAUM +29.2%

FGDL vs IAUM Performance

Oct 13, 2025 – Oct 13, 2026

+0.8%FGDL+1.3%IAUM

Oct 13, 2025 to Oct 13, 2026. FGDL +0.8%. IAUM +1.3%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.10%20%30%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
FGDL 0.15%
IAUM 0.09%, better
Fund size
FGDL $433M
IAUM $8.01B
1Y total return
FGDL +0.8%
IAUM +1.3%, better
Holdings
FGDL 1
IAUM 1
Avg volume (30D)
FGDL 18.4K sh
IAUM 2.58M sh, better
NAV per share
FGDL $55.48
IAUM $41.54
52W range

ETF.net Grade

FGDL: Cost 77, Risk 49, Mission 100, Tradability 23, Holdings not scored, Durability 32. IAUM: Cost 91, Risk 49, Mission 100, Tradability 47, Holdings not scored, Durability 60.
Pillar letters and Scores for FGDL, IAUM, with each pillar’s weight
PillarFGDLIAUM
Cost30% weightA77A91Higher
Mission25% weightA100A100
Risk15% weightC49C49
Tradability15% weightF23C47Higher
Holdings10% weightNot scoredNot scored
Durability5% weightD32B60Higher

Rank among Physical Gold funds

Same Category. FGDL and IAUM are both graded against the same 10 Physical Gold funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Physical Gold⁠

Category · 10 funds
See all 10 ›

IAUM ranks 2nd and FGDL 3rd of 10 funds in the Physical Gold Category.

  1. Rank 1AGLDMSPDR Gold MiniShares TrustScore 81
  2. Rank 2AIAUMiShares Gold Trust MicroScore 77
  3. Rank 3BFGDLFranklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETFScore 67
  4. Rank 4BSGOLabrdn Physical Gold Shares ETFScore 66

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

FGDLBFranklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF

IAUMAiShares Gold Trust Micro

In short

FGDL Gold in a vault, with two twists: the bars come with Franklin's responsible-sourcing label, and the fund charges nothing to hold them. Assets are bullion and cash, full stop.

IAUM Bullion in a vault, at 0.09% a year, roughly half the typical fee among physical gold funds. This is iShares' small-fee take on owning metal, priced off the LBMA Gold Price benchmark.

Stated mandate

FGDL The Fund seeks to track the price of gold bullion, after deducting expenses. Its assets consist only of gold bullion and cash, if any.

IAUM The Trust seeks to reflect the performance of gold, before its expenses and liabilities, by holding physical gold.

Why people hold it

  • FGDL A 0.00% expense ratio in a cohort whose median is 0.17%. Even the cheap giants charge something (GLDM 0.10%, IAUM 0.09%, GLD 0.40%).
  • Simple plumbing: a grantor trust that holds gold bullion and cash and tracks the metal's price after expenses. No futures, no swaps, no miners.
  • The responsible-sourcing standard is the pitch in a group where every fund owns the same metal, and Franklin spells it out in the trust's own filings.
  • Does what it says: mandate, wrapper and holdings all line up, and it sits in the upper half of the physical gold cohort.
  • IAUM Fee is 0.09% a year against a 0.17% median for physical gold peers, a hair under GLDM (0.10%) and well under SGOL (0.17%) and AAAU (0.18%).
  • Plain plumbing: a grantor trust that holds physical gold and seeks to reflect gold's performance, before expenses and liabilities, against the LBMA Gold Price.ishares.com
  • A multi-billion-dollar fund that trades actively, and it tracks its gold benchmark about as closely as anything in the physical gold group.

Worth knowing

  • FGDL Thinly traded next to the category's heavyweights, which can mean wider bid/ask spreads on the way in and out.
  • Bullion pays no income, and the fund makes no distributions. The gold price, less costs, is the whole story.
  • Launched in 2022 and far smaller than the decade-old gold trusts, so the track record is short by cohort standards.
  • IAUM No income here. The trust has made no distributions, so return is gold's price move minus the fee, nothing else.
  • Gold swings hard on sentiment and rates, and there is no yield to cushion a drawdown.
  • Launched in 2021, it is younger than the bullion trusts that anchor this category and not the deepest-traded name among them.

Full FGDL profile⁠

Full IAUM profile⁠

FGDL vs IAUM Holdings

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Only FGDL
1
of 1
In both
0
holdings
Only IAUM
1
of 1

Holdings side by side

Top 10 holdings by combined weight
HoldingFGDLIAUM
Gold Oz.Gold Oz.100.02%Not held
Physical GoldPhysical GoldNot held100.00%

All 2 FGDL holdings⁠All IAUM holdings⁠

FGDL vs IAUM Cost

Expense ratio

  • 0.15%FGDL
  • 0.09%IAUM, cheaper
  • Middle half of Physical Gold funds
  • Median 0.17%

0 of 10 Physical Gold funds charge less than IAUM

2 of 10 charge less than FGDL

$1,239less in fees with IAUM over 30 years, on $10,000 invested

$0$1,000$2,000$3,000$4,000Start10 years20 years30 years

Assumes $10,000 invested once and 7% growth a year before fees.

FGDL vs IAUM Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 13, 2026
Payout (12M)
FGDL: None
IAUM: None

Distribution history

FGDLAll FGDL payments⁠

No distribution history available.

IAUMAll IAUM payments⁠

No distribution history available.

FGDL vs IAUM Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
FGDL 19.1%IAUM 19.0%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
FGDL 1.28IAUM 1.29, better
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
FGDL −26.6%since Jun 2022IAUM −26.3%, better
Market sensitivityBeta, 3 years
FGDL 0.41IAUM 0.41=

FGDL and IAUM in the news

Popular comparisons