TLT vs GLD: returns, risk and drawdowns compared
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF against SPDR Gold Shares, over the same 20 years (November 2006 to October 2026) with dividends reinvested.
Data updated October 2026
TLT
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF
10,000 became
16,751
- A year on average
- +2.6%
- Annual volatility
- 14.0%
- Deepest fall
- −47.6%
- Worst month
- −13.1%
GLD
SPDR Gold Shares
10,000 became
61,414
- A year on average
- +9.5%
- Annual volatility
- 17.4%
- Deepest fall
- −42.9%
- Worst month
- −16.1%
GLD came out ahead by 6.9 percentage points a year from November 2006 to October 2026. GLD swung more (17.4% against 14.0% a year). The correlation of monthly returns was 0.27: they moved largely independently.
Growth of 10,000: TLT vs GLD
Who was ahead, and when
The gap between the two over the previous three years, at each month-end. Above zero TLT had returned more, below zero GLD. TLT was ahead in 34% of the 205 three-year periods.
Annualised 3-year return of TLT minus that of GLD, in percentage points a year.
Falls from the previous high
Month-end values. Deepest fall: TLT −47.6%, GLD −42.9%.
All the figures
| TLT | GLD | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual return (CAGR) | +2.6% | +9.5% |
| Total return | +68% | +514% |
| Annual volatility | 14.0% | 17.4% |
| Deepest fall (month-end) | −47.6% | −42.9% |
| Worst month | −13.1% | −16.1% |
| Best month | +14.3% | +12.8% |
| Positive months | 51% | 53% |
| Best year | 2011: +34.0% | 2025: +63.7% |
| Worst year | 2022: −31.2% | 2013: −28.3% |
| 1-year return | −8.8% | −2.0% |
| 5 years, a year | −7.9% | +17.1% |
| 10 years, a year | −2.3% | +11.8% |
| Trading currency | USD | USD |
First nine rows: the same 240 months for both funds. Trailing returns: to each fund’s last close.
Year by year
Full calendar years both funds were trading. The higher of the two each year is in bold.
Holding both: half TLT, half GLD
| TLT alone | GLD alone | 50/50 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A year on average | +2.6% | +9.5% | +6.5% |
| Annual volatility | 14.0% | 17.4% | 12.5% |
| Deepest fall (month-end) | −47.6% | −42.9% | −30.3% |
| Worst month | −13.1% | −16.1% | −9.0% |
Because the two did not always move together, the mix swung less than the average of the two (12.5% against 15.7%). Rebalanced to 50/50 every month, before costs.
Questions
Which has returned more, TLT or GLD?
From November 2006 to October 2026, TLT returned +2.6% a year and GLD +9.5% a year, with dividends reinvested. Over rolling 3-year periods TLT did better in 34% of cases. Past returns do not predict future returns.
Which is riskier, TLT or GLD?
Over the same months annual volatility was 14.0% for TLT and 17.4% for GLD; the deepest fall from a month-end high was 47.6% and 42.9%, and the worst single month −13.1% and −16.1%.
How correlated are TLT and GLD?
The correlation of their monthly returns was 0.27: they moved largely independently. Combining them has historically smoothed the ups and downs of either one alone.
What about holding both TLT and GLD?
Half in each, rebalanced every month, returned +6.5% a year over the same period, with 12.5% annual volatility and a deepest month-end fall of 30.3%.
More comparisons
How the figures are calculated
Total return in the fund’s trading currency, from end-of-day prices with dividends reinvested on the ex-date. The fund’s own ongoing charges are already reflected in its price; trading costs, taxes and currency conversion are not included. Past returns do not predict future returns.
The comparison uses only the months in which both funds have prices, so the figures cover the same period even when one fund is older.
Source: MarketStack end-of-day prices, total return with dividends reinvested. Figures are historical and descriptive; they are not forecasts and not investment advice. MEDGE Capital does not recommend buying or selling any instrument. Risk disclaimer.