MF Analyser

360 ONE Gold ETF vs ANGEL ONE GOLD ETF

360 ONE Gold ETF and ANGEL ONE GOLD ETF are both Gold Index Funds & ETFs. As of 5 Nov 2026 (Direct plan, Growth option): 3-year CAGR — vs —, 5-year CAGR — vs —, volatility 24.81% vs 28.10%, maximum drawdown −22.05% vs −22.02%.

Showing the Direct plan, Growth option. Portfolio, sector and market-cap figures are the same for every plan and option of a fund.

Key facts

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
Fund house360 ONE Mutual FundAngel One Mutual Fund
Compared asGold Index Funds & ETFsGold Index Funds & ETFs
NAV₹139.1509₹13.3179
NAV date5 Nov 20265 Nov 2026
Launched (first NAV)17 Mar 202510 Sep 2025
Track record1.6 yrs1.2 yrs
Fund size (AUM)—₹87 Cr
Securities held—1
Portfolio as ofNot disclosed yet30 Sep 2026
Fund pageFull record →Full record →

Returns

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
1 month−3.06%−3.05%
3 months−3.27%−3.25%
6 months−5.07%−5.05%
1 year+18.21%+18.39%
3 years (CAGR)——
5 years (CAGR)——
7 years (CAGR)——
10 years (CAGR)——
Since launch (CAGR)+32.90%+25.26%
SIP return (XIRR, 5 years) ⓘ——

Up to one year: absolute return. Beyond one year: CAGR. Computed from each fund's own NAV history (AMFI), measured to the latest NAV.

Calendar-year returns

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
2026 (year to date)+7.29%+7.41%

Risk

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
Volatility (annualised) ⓘ24.81%28.10%
Downside volatility ⓘ11.96%13.90%
Sharpe ratio ⓘ1.060.67
Sortino ratio ⓘ2.211.35
Maximum drawdown ⓘ−22.05%−22.02%
Recovery from that fall——
Current fall from peak−18.19%−18.13%
Rolling 1-year return: worst+11.13%+11.25%
Rolling 1-year return: median+47.05%+21.12%
Rolling 1-year return: best+72.93%+38.16%
Share of 1-year periods with a loss0.00%0.00%

Against each fund's benchmark

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
Beta ⓘ0.270.27
Alpha (Jensen's, annualised) ⓘ+24.45%+18.91%
R² ⓘ2.402.51
Upside capture58.18%-3.73%
Downside capture-108.55%-106.60%
Tracking error27.41%31.39%
Information ratio1.100.83
Treynor ratio87.9051.08

Portfolio

360 ONE Gold ETF has no usable portfolio disclosure on file yet, so portfolio comparisons are shown only where available.

Asset mix

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
Equity—9,725.00%
Cash & equivalents—-9,625.00%

Market-cap split (share of fund assets)

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
Large Cap—0.00%
Mid Cap—0.00%
Small Cap—0.00%
Unclassified—9,725.00%

Concentration

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
Top 10 holdings—9,725.00%
Effective number of stocks ⓘ—0
Securities held—1

Top 10 holdings

360 ONE Gold ETF

Not disclosed yet.

ANGEL ONE GOLD ETF

  1. Gold Commodity9,725.00%

Sector exposure

360 ONE Gold ETFANGEL ONE GOLD ETF
OTHERS—9,725.00%

Questions people ask

What is the difference between 360 ONE Gold ETF and ANGEL ONE GOLD ETF returns?

As of 5 Nov 2026, Direct plan Growth option: 1-year return +18.21% vs +18.39%; 3-year CAGR — vs —; 5-year CAGR — vs —; 10-year CAGR — vs —. Past returns do not indicate future returns.

How do 360 ONE Gold ETF and ANGEL ONE GOLD ETF compare on risk?

Volatility (36 monthly returns, annualised) 24.81% vs 28.10%; Sharpe ratio 1.06 vs 0.67; Sortino ratio 2.21 vs 1.35; maximum drawdown −22.05% vs −22.02%; beta 0.27 vs 0.27.

Is this a recommendation to choose one of these funds?

No. This page places the published figures of both funds side by side. It does not rank, rate or recommend either fund; which one suits an investor depends on their goals, horizon and risk tolerance.

More comparisons

All Gold Index Funds & ETFs comparisons → · Compare up to six funds yourself → · Every fund in this category → · All comparisons →

Sources: NAV from AMFI; returns, risk and ratios computed by MF Analyser from each fund's NAV history (risk on 36 monthly returns, risk-free rate 6.5%); benchmark ratios against each fund's benchmark total-return index; portfolios from each fund house's monthly disclosure. Returns and ratios as of 5 Nov 2026. IDCW options show no return or risk figures because payouts reduce the NAV and AMFI's file carries no payout history to add back. This page compares published figures only — it does not rank, rate or recommend either fund. Past performance does not indicate future returns; mutual fund investments are subject to market risks.