XAU vs RING: Returns, Risk & Volatility (2026)

Q: Which is a better investment: XAU or RING?

Over the past year, RING looks like the better investment: it had higher total return (RING +155.8% vs XAU +72.3%) and a higher Sharpe ratio (RING 2.36 vs XAU 2.15). On risk, XAU was less volatile (XAU 24.7% vs RING 43.2%), XAU had a smaller max drawdown (XAU -13.9% vs RING -19.2%), and XAU had less severe losses on the worst 5% of days (Expected Shortfall of XAU -3.77% vs RING -6.96%).

Written by Gale Finance Team

Reviewed by Sid Kalla CFA Charterholder

Quick answer

Which is a better investment: XAU or RING?

Over the past year, RING outperformed (+72.3% vs +155.8%) with a Sharpe ratio of 2.36.

Total Return

XAU +72.3%

RING WIN +155.8%

Sharpe Ratio

XAU 2.15

RING WIN 2.36

Annualized Volatility

XAU WIN 24.7%

RING 43.2%

Max Drawdown

XAU WIN -13.9%

RING -19.2%

Analysis period: 2025-02-18 to 2026-02-13

XAU Total Return

↑ +72.3%

RING Total Return

↑ +155.8%

Relative Performance of XAU vs RING (Normalized to 100)

XAU RING

Normalized to 100 at start date for comparison

Key Takeaways

Total Return: XAU delivered a +72.3% total return, while RING returned +155.8% over the same period. RING outperformed on total returns.
Risk-Adjusted Return (Sharpe Ratio): RING had a higher Sharpe (2.36 vs 2.15), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.
Volatility (Annualized): RING was more volatile, with 43.2% annualized volatility, versus 24.7% for XAU.
Maximum Drawdown: XAU's maximum drawdown was -13.9%, while RING experienced a deeper drawdown of -19.2%.
Tail Risk (VaR & Expected Shortfall): At the 5% level (daily log returns), XAU's VaR was -2.04% and its Expected Shortfall (CVaR) was -3.77%; RING's were -4.21% and -6.96%. VaR is the cutoff; Expected Shortfall is the average move on the worst days.
Skew & Kurtosis: Skew: XAU -1.24 vs RING -1.12. Excess kurtosis: XAU 8.73 vs RING 4.09. Negative skew leans downside; higher excess kurtosis means fatter tails.
Tail Days & Extremes: 2σ tail days (down/up): XAU 6/4, RING 8/2. Worst day: XAU -9.87% (2026-01-30) vs RING -12.84% (2026-01-30). Best day: XAU +6.13% (2026-02-03) vs RING +8.58% (2025-04-09).
Risk ratios: Sortino - XAU: 3.11 vs. RING: 3.38 , Calmar - XAU: 5.37 vs. RING: 8.43 , Sterling - XAU: 5.07 vs. RING: 9.49 , Treynor - XAU: 10.30 vs. RING: 2.20 , Ulcer Index - XAU: 3.67% vs. RING: 5.90%

Gold vs iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF Correlation

0.78 Average Correlation

Gold and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF are strongly correlated over the past year. With a correlation of 0.78, these assets tend to move together, limiting diversification benefits.

For portfolio construction, this strong correlation means holding both XAU and RING provides limited risk reduction — they're likely to decline together in downturns.

Metric	Value
Current (30-day)	0.88
Average (full period)	0.78
Minimum	0.57
Maximum	0.91

Correlation measures how closely two assets move together. Values near +1 indicate strong co-movement, near 0 indicates independence, and negative values indicate inverse movement.

Investment Comparison

If you invested $10,000 in each asset on February 18, 2025:

XAU $17,233.46 +72.3%

RING $25,577.98 +155.8%

Difference: $8,344.52 (RING ahead)

Gold and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF: Risk Analysis

Gold experienced its maximum drawdown of -13.9% from 2026-01-28 to 2026-02-02. It has not yet recovered to its previous peak.

iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF experienced its maximum drawdown of -19.2% from 2025-10-16 to 2025-11-04. It took 37 days to recover.

Smaller drawdowns and faster recoveries indicate lower downside risk and greater resilience during market stress.

Sharpe Ratio of XAU and RING

XAU Sharpe Ratio

↑ 2.15

RING Sharpe Ratio

↑ 2.36

Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk (volatility). A higher Sharpe indicates better risk-adjusted performance. RING had a higher Sharpe (2.36 vs 2.15), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.

A Sharpe above 1.0 is generally considered good, above 2.0 is excellent. Negative Sharpe means the asset underperformed the risk-free rate. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Sortino Ratio of XAU and RING

XAU Sortino Ratio

↑ 3.11

RING Sortino Ratio

↑ 3.38

Sortino ratio measures return per unit of downside risk. Unlike Sharpe, it only counts downside deviation (returns below the target return). RING had better downside-adjusted returns.

A higher Sortino is better. It's useful when upside volatility is common (crypto is the obvious example). Downside deviation: XAU 17.1% vs RING 30.2%. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices, using the daily risk-free rate as the target return, and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Calmar Ratio of XAU and RING

XAU Calmar Ratio

↑ 5.37

RING Calmar Ratio

↑ 8.43

Calmar ratio compares CAGR to maximum drawdown. Higher Calmar means more return per unit of worst drawdown. RING posted the higher Calmar ratio.

Calmar is computed on each asset's full 365-day lookback and uses the max drawdown over that same window.

Sterling Ratio of XAU and RING

XAU Sterling Ratio

↑ 5.07

RING Sterling Ratio

↑ 9.49

Sterling ratio measures excess return per unit of average drawdown (typically drawdowns worse than 10%). RING posted the higher Sterling ratio.

Sterling uses average drawdown events deeper than 10% and subtracts the risk-free rate to report excess return.

Treynor Ratio of XAU and RING

XAU Treynor Ratio

↑ 10.30

RING Treynor Ratio

↑ 2.20

Treynor ratio measures excess return per unit of market risk (beta) instead of total volatility. XAU posted the higher Treynor ratio.

Treynor uses beta vs the S&P 500 (SPY) on shared dates and the average 3-month Treasury rate as the risk-free rate.

Ulcer Index of XAU and RING

XAU Ulcer Index

3.67%

RING Ulcer Index

5.90%

Ulcer Index captures drawdown depth and duration. Lower Ulcer Index means less drawdown pain. XAU had the lower Ulcer Index (less drawdown pain).

Ulcer Index is computed from each asset's drawdown series over the full lookback window.

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): Gold vs. iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF

This section looks at the shape of daily returns, not just the average. Tail stats are computed per asset on its own daily series (crypto includes weekends). We use daily log returns $\ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)$ so multi-day moves add cleanly.

Definitions: Value at Risk (VaR), Expected Shortfall, skew, kurtosis, and fat tails.

Metric (1-Year)	XAU	RING
5% VaR (daily log return)	-2.04%	-4.21%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-3.77% (worst 13 days)	-6.96% (worst 13 days)
Skew	-1.24	-1.12
Excess kurtosis	8.73	4.09
2σ tail days (down / up)	6 / 4	8 / 2
Worst day	-9.87% (2026-01-30)	-12.84% (2026-01-30)
Best day	+6.13% (2026-02-03)	+8.58% (2025-04-09)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Computed on shared dates only (n=245). A “2σ downside move” means a shared-close log return more than 2 standard deviations below that asset’s own mean on this shared-date series. Dates below show simple returns (%) for readability.

When RING has a big down day, XAU also does

50.0%

4 / 8 days

When XAU has a big down day, RING also does

80.0%

4 / 5 days

Show downside tail dates

Dates below are shared-date observations. The “Date” is the period end (close). Tail thresholds are computed on log returns, but the table shows simple returns (%) for readability. Returns are computed from the previous shared close to this one (for example, Friday → Monday includes weekend moves).

Days when both XAU and RING had a big down day (2σ)

Date (interval)	XAU	RING
2025-10-21	-5.31%	-10.03%
2025-12-26 → 2025-12-29	-4.40%	-6.55%
2026-01-30	-9.87%	-12.84%
2026-02-05	-3.73%	-6.54%

Days when XAU had a big down day

Date (interval)	XAU	RING
2025-10-21	-5.31%	-10.03%
2025-12-26 → 2025-12-29	-4.40%	-6.55%
2026-01-30	-9.87%	-12.84%
2026-01-30 → 2026-02-02	-3.85%	+0.09%
2026-02-05	-3.73%	-6.54%

Days when RING had a big down day

Date (interval)	XAU	RING
2025-04-04	-2.52%	-9.05%
2025-05-09 → 2025-05-12	-2.79%	-7.75%
2025-10-17	-2.37%	-7.23%
2025-10-21	-5.31%	-10.03%
2025-11-20	-0.02%	-5.01%
2025-12-26 → 2025-12-29	-4.40%	-6.55%
2026-01-30	-9.87%	-12.84%
2026-02-05	-3.73%	-6.54%

Read this as “how ugly the ugly days get”, not as a precise forecast. One-year samples are small, so tail estimates are inherently noisy.

Gold vs iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF Volatility (XAU vs RING)

XAU Volatility

24.7%

±1.56% daily

RING Volatility

43.2%

±2.72% daily

Typical daily swing

XAU

±1.56%

RING

±2.72%

Gold's annualized volatility of 24.7% means it typically moves ±1.56% on any given day.

iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF's annualized volatility of 43.2% means it typically moves ±2.72% on any given day.

RING's higher volatility means a wider path to returns — this can be attractive for tactical, shorter-term exposure, while XAU's smoother profile may better suit long-term allocators seeking steadier growth.

For comparison, the S&P 500 typically has 15-18% annualized volatility, translating to roughly ±1% daily moves. Higher volatility means larger potential gains but also larger potential losses.

Gold vs iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF Performance Over Time

Metric	XAU	RING
30 Days	12.2%	10.5%
90 Days	22.6%	34.3%
180 Days	50.7%	79%
1 Year	N/A	N/A

Shorter time frames can show different leaders as market conditions change. Consider your investment horizon when comparing performance.

Full Comparison of Gold vs. iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (1-Year)

Metric	XAU	RING
Total Return	+72.3%	+155.8%
Annualized Volatility	24.7%	43.2%
Sharpe Ratio	2.15	2.36
Sortino Ratio	3.11	3.38
Calmar Ratio	5.37	8.43
Sterling Ratio	5.07	9.49
Treynor Ratio	10.30	2.20
Ulcer Index	3.67%	5.90%
Max Drawdown	-13.9%	-19.2%
Avg Correlation to S&P 500	-0.07	0.12
5% VaR (daily log return)	-2.04%	-4.21%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-3.77%	-6.96%
Skew	-1.24	-1.12
Excess kurtosis	8.73	4.09
2σ tail days (down / up)	6 / 4	8 / 2

Audit this calculation

Formulas, inputs, and conventions used to compute the metrics on this page.

Inputs & conventions

Shared window for pair metrics: 2025-02-18 → 2026-02-09 (last shared close).
Rolling correlation sample (shared closes): 216 rolling 30-day values (from 245 shared daily returns).
Annualization (days/year): XAU: 252 days/year; RING: 252 days/year.
Risk-free rate: Uses the 3-month U.S. Treasury yield (FRED: DGS3MO), averaged over each asset’s window:

XAU: 4.20% over 2025-02-17 → 2026-02-13.

RING: 4.20% over 2025-02-18 → 2026-02-09.
Volatility drag (rule of thumb): Estimated from annualized volatility (simple returns). For the log-return framing, see Log returns.

XAU: ≈ -3.1%/yr

RING: ≈ -9.3%/yr
Data alignment: No forward fill. Correlation and tail co-moves are computed on shared closes only.
For cross-calendar pairs (e.g., crypto vs stocks), weekend/holiday moves roll into the next shared close.
Return conventions: Volatility/Sharpe/Sortino use simple daily returns. Tail-risk uses daily log returns for distribution stats (but tables show simple returns). Log returns.

Formulas

Daily simple return

r_t = \frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}} - 1

Volatility

\sigma_{ann} = \sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}

Volatility drag (approx.)

\text{drag} \approx \tfrac{1}{2}\sigma_{ann}^2

Sharpe Ratio

S = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}}

Sortino Ratio

So = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sqrt{\mathbb{E}[\min(0,\,r_t - r_f/A)^2]}\,\sqrt{A}}

Maximum Drawdown

MDD = \min_t\left(\frac{P_t}{\max_{s \le t} P_s} - 1\right)

Average Correlation

\rho = \frac{\operatorname{cov}(r^A,\,r^B)}{\sigma_A\,\sigma_B}

Log returns

\ell_t = \ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)

Notation

$P_t$: Price on day t.
$r_t$: Simple daily return.
$\ell_t$: Log daily return.
$\bar{r}$: Average daily return.
$\sigma(r_t)$: Standard deviation of daily returns.
$A$: Annualization factor (days/year).
$r_f$: Annual risk-free rate.

Gold vs iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: XAU or RING?

RING showed higher volatility at 43.2% annualized, compared to 24.7% for XAU Over the past year. Higher volatility means larger price swings in both directions.

Does XAU provide diversification when held with RING?

XAU and RING are strongly correlated over the past year, with an average correlation of 0.78. This strong correlation limits diversification benefits.

How bad are the worst 5% days for XAU vs RING?

Over the past year, XAU's 5% VaR was -2.04% and its 5% Expected Shortfall was -3.77% (worst 13 days). RING's were -4.21% and -6.96% (worst 13 days).

Do XAU and RING crash together on bad days?

On shared dates (n=245), when RING has a 2σ down day, XAU also does 50.0% (4/8 days). In the other direction, when XAU has one, RING also does 80.0% (4/5 days).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: XAU or RING?

RING showed better risk-adjusted performance with a Sharpe ratio of 2.36 versus XAU's 2.15 Over the past year.

Can XAU and RING be combined in a portfolio?

Yes, though allocation sizing matters. Their strong correlation provides limited risk reduction since they tend to move together. RING's higher volatility (43.2%) means even small allocations can materially impact overall portfolio risk.