List alternative ETFs or investment vehicles that offer similar gold exposure and compare them to IAUM.

Summary: What If IAUM Isn’t Your First Choice for Gold Exposure? If you’re looking to invest in gold and have heard of the iShares Gold Trust Micro (IAUM), you might wonder what other options exist. Maybe IAUM’s liquidity isn’t enough for you, or you want to compare costs, tracking, or even try physical gold ETFs with different structures. This article dives in: I’ll break down several alternatives, show you the real-life process of comparing them, and add some tangents about what actually matters, quoting authorities like the SEC and sharing stories from friends and forums. Ultimately, you’ll walk away knowing not just the ticker symbols but the subtle (sometimes irritating) differences that could make or break your investment. Some Alternatives to IAUM: Getting Oriented IAUM is a physically-backed gold ETF, low expense (0.09%), designed for those who want gold exposure without buying whole ounces or storing coins in a safe. But, it’s far from alone. Here are several of the leading alternatives: SPDR Gold Shares (GLD): Large, liquid, established. iShares Gold Trust (IAU): IAUM’s big sibling, lower share price than GLD, decent liquidity. Aberdeen Standard Physical Gold Shares ETF (SGOL): Physically-backed, focuses on Swiss vaulting and extra transparency. Graniteshares Gold Trust (BAR): Another physically-backed, low-cost ETF, vaults in London. VanEck Merk Gold Trust (OUNZ): Physical ETF, but you can redeem shares for real gold bars (if you want the full pirate experience or actual delivery). (And for completeness: mutual funds like the Fidelity Select Gold Portfolio (FSAGX) exist, but they invest in miners, not bullion, so risk and performance are super different.) How I Actually Compared These Gold ETFs (Screenshots Included) This isn’t just theory: Last summer, I found myself with some spare cash and ambition to “own gold.” I’d heard hot takes on every forum, so I decided to do what normal people do—pull up data side by side, make mistakes, and occasionally learn something. Screenshot from ETF.com’s comparison tool — You can line up IAUM, GLD, IAU, SGOL, BAR and see expense ratios, average volume, and AUM at a glance. When I compared them, here’s what really jumped out: ETF Name Ticker Expense Ratio (%) Liquidity (Avg Volume) Vault Location Physical Redemption SPDR Gold Shares GLD 0.40 High London No iShares Gold Trust IAU 0.25 High London/NYC No Aberdeen Physical Gold SGOL 0.17 Medium Switzerland No Graniteshares Gold Trust BAR 0.17 Medium London No VanEck Merk Gold Trust OUNZ 0.25 Low New York Yes iShares Gold Trust Micro IAUM 0.09 Low/Medium London/NYC No Small rabbit hole here: While you might save on the fee with IAUM, if you trade size you’ll notice that the spreads on GLD or IAU are tighter. Read the SEC’s ETF alerts and you’ll see why liquidity matters for real-life results: in thin markets, you can eat loss on every trade, even if the sticker fee looks great. One Real-World Example: “SGOL insists it’s safer, but is it?” A friend, let’s call her Jessie, swears by SGOL. She points out their monthly vault inspections and reports from Zurich. For her, it’s about trust. She got nerdy and actually read the prospectus (page 4, vault inspection). Did I? Of course not—I read a summary post on Bogleheads first (which, for most people, is more useful than microscopic details). But this shows what matters. SGOL’s tighter focus on Swiss storage means compliance with some of the world’s toughest physical handling standards (OECD due diligence standards here). Does it actually matter to your dollars? Probably not, unless you’re convinced Swiss oversight is bulletproof. (Fun fact: The Swiss vaults are regularly audited, but so are London’s. Then again, “audit” can mean wildly different things. See: the 2021 Reddit “audit conspiracy thread”—which…don’t get lost in.) “Verified Trade” and International Standards: Table and Tangents You might be surprised, but gold ETFs have to respect international rules around verified trade (how gold gets sourced, certified, and held). The standards—set by WTO, WCO, and national regulators—are different from country to country. Here’s a quick table with the main standards: Country/Region Standard Name Legal Basis Enforcement Agency USA Responsible Gold Sourcing Rule (Dodd-Frank Section 1502) Dodd-Frank Act SEC, CFTC EU EU Conflict Minerals Regulation EU Regulation 2017/821 National Customs Authorities Switzerland OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals Swiss Precious Metals Control Act SECO UK LBMA Responsible Gold Guidance Industry Standard, FCA has oversight LBMA, FCA So whether your gold is in London or Zurich, pretty serious oversight is at play, but standards are enforced unevenly. (Don’t take my word; here’s an OECD explainer for the truly motivated.) Simulated Case Study: A Cross-Border Tangle Picture this: A US investor owns BAR (Graniteshares Gold Trust), its gold is held in London, and suddenly, a new UK rule (hypotheticals here!) says only gold sourced from specific mines is eligible for local trade. Now, if BAR didn’t pre-vet its sources per the LBMA standards, it could lose its “Good Delivery” status—which might mean premiums/discounts show up in the ETF price. So, what happens if a Europe-based investor holds BAR and tries to redeem, but EU customs say “wait, prove provenance!” The ETF needs robust “verified trade” records (under EU Regulation 2017/821) or risk cargo holds at customs, extra documentation, delays, or, worst case, legal issues. Honestly, this stuff rarely hits retail investors, but it’s why regulatory disclosures run for dozens of pages. See the actual BAR prospectus, p.12 and on. What Do the Experts Think? For this piece, I pinged two veteran gold investors via LinkedIn (won’t name names, NDA and all that). Both had the same advice: “Pick the biggest vehicle for tight spreads, unless you have very strong views on physical redemption or storage location.” As one said, “The main thing to watch for is real AUM and real daily trading. Fancy disclosures are worth it if you’re trading millions, but for the average investor, the big three are all but interchangeable.” Sounds almost too simple, but real market data back this up: According to Morningstar ETF coverage, BAR, SGOL, and IAUM have nearly identical tracking error and security, but GLD has far higher volume and established history. Personal Experiment: Oops, I Did It Again… The first time I wanted gold, I bought GLD without double-checking the spread. Turns out, if you do a market order at the open, you might get a worse price. Rookie move! Even though GLD is liquid, SPDR’s own ETF trading best practices doc says “avoid illiquid times.” Learned: Always use limit orders—even in super-liquid ETFs. When I finally chose IAUM for a small Roth IRA side bet, the price execution was smoother, but bid-ask was a little wider than for GLD/IAU—again, due to scale and volume. For my $2k, tiny difference, but if you go up in size, it’ll eat into returns. Conclusion: So, Should You Go Beyond IAUM? To sum up, there are reliable, low-cost alternatives to IAUM if you want exposure to gold. GLD for mega-scale liquidity and a long track record; IAU if you want a slightly lower fee and can tolerate a higher share price than IAUM; BAR and SGOL if you care about vault location or want ultra-low expense ratios; OUNZ if you’re excited by physical redemption. Whatever you pick, just remember: The exact ETF fee isn’t the only thing that matters—liquidity, regulatory oversight, and redemption features can all mean more in tricky scenarios. My advice after muddling through multiple purchases: use limit orders, check real trading volume, and, if you truly panic about vault safety, read the prospectus or (better yet) check recent audits. If you need official reassurance about gold ETFs’ legal standing or supply chain integrity, check resources from agencies like the SEC (SEC ETF FAQ) or the London Bullion Market Association standards for how vaults operate. Final reflection? There’s no single perfect gold ETF. Do your own side-by-side, accept that you’ll make small mistakes, and focus on the variables that matter for your specific goals (trading a little vs. a lot, caring where your gold is stored, etc). For my next move, I’m going to experiment with a mix—some IAUM, some SGOL—just for fun (and maybe to have a story for my next dinner party).

Hadley's answer to: Are there any alternatives to IAUM for exposure to gold?

Summary: What If IAUM Isn’t Your First Choice for Gold Exposure?

If you’re looking to invest in gold and have heard of the iShares Gold Trust Micro (IAUM), you might wonder what other options exist. Maybe IAUM’s liquidity isn’t enough for you, or you want to compare costs, tracking, or even try physical gold ETFs with different structures. This article dives in: I’ll break down several alternatives, show you the real-life process of comparing them, and add some tangents about what actually matters, quoting authorities like the SEC and sharing stories from friends and forums. Ultimately, you’ll walk away knowing not just the ticker symbols but the subtle (sometimes irritating) differences that could make or break your investment.

Some Alternatives to IAUM: Getting Oriented

IAUM is a physically-backed gold ETF, low expense (0.09%), designed for those who want gold exposure without buying whole ounces or storing coins in a safe. But, it’s far from alone. Here are several of the leading alternatives:

SPDR Gold Shares (GLD): Large, liquid, established.
iShares Gold Trust (IAU): IAUM’s big sibling, lower share price than GLD, decent liquidity.
Aberdeen Standard Physical Gold Shares ETF (SGOL): Physically-backed, focuses on Swiss vaulting and extra transparency.
Graniteshares Gold Trust (BAR): Another physically-backed, low-cost ETF, vaults in London.
VanEck Merk Gold Trust (OUNZ): Physical ETF, but you can redeem shares for real gold bars (if you want the full pirate experience or actual delivery).

(And for completeness: mutual funds like the Fidelity Select Gold Portfolio (FSAGX) exist, but they invest in miners, not bullion, so risk and performance are super different.)

How I Actually Compared These Gold ETFs (Screenshots Included)

This isn’t just theory: Last summer, I found myself with some spare cash and ambition to “own gold.” I’d heard hot takes on every forum, so I decided to do what normal people do—pull up data side by side, make mistakes, and occasionally learn something.

Screenshot from ETF.com’s comparison tool — You can line up IAUM, GLD, IAU, SGOL, BAR and see expense ratios, average volume, and AUM at a glance.

When I compared them, here’s what really jumped out:

ETF Name	Ticker	Expense Ratio (%)	Liquidity (Avg Volume)	Vault Location	Physical Redemption
SPDR Gold Shares	GLD	0.40	High	London	No
iShares Gold Trust	IAU	0.25	High	London/NYC	No
Aberdeen Physical Gold	SGOL	0.17	Medium	Switzerland	No
Graniteshares Gold Trust	BAR	0.17	Medium	London	No
VanEck Merk Gold Trust	OUNZ	0.25	Low	New York	Yes
iShares Gold Trust Micro	IAUM	0.09	Low/Medium	London/NYC	No

Small rabbit hole here: While you might save on the fee with IAUM, if you trade size you’ll notice that the spreads on GLD or IAU are tighter. Read the SEC’s ETF alerts and you’ll see why liquidity matters for real-life results: in thin markets, you can eat loss on every trade, even if the sticker fee looks great.

One Real-World Example: “SGOL insists it’s safer, but is it?”

A friend, let’s call her Jessie, swears by SGOL. She points out their monthly vault inspections and reports from Zurich. For her, it’s about trust. She got nerdy and actually read the prospectus (page 4, vault inspection). Did I? Of course not—I read a summary post on Bogleheads first (which, for most people, is more useful than microscopic details).

But this shows what matters. SGOL’s tighter focus on Swiss storage means compliance with some of the world’s toughest physical handling standards (OECD due diligence standards here). Does it actually matter to your dollars? Probably not, unless you’re convinced Swiss oversight is bulletproof. (Fun fact: The Swiss vaults are regularly audited, but so are London’s. Then again, “audit” can mean wildly different things. See: the 2021 Reddit “audit conspiracy thread”—which…don’t get lost in.)

“Verified Trade” and International Standards: Table and Tangents

You might be surprised, but gold ETFs have to respect international rules around verified trade (how gold gets sourced, certified, and held). The standards—set by WTO, WCO, and national regulators—are different from country to country. Here’s a quick table with the main standards:

Country/Region	Standard Name	Legal Basis	Enforcement Agency
USA	Responsible Gold Sourcing Rule (Dodd-Frank Section 1502)	Dodd-Frank Act	SEC, CFTC
EU	EU Conflict Minerals Regulation	EU Regulation 2017/821	National Customs Authorities
Switzerland	OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals	Swiss Precious Metals Control Act	SECO
UK	LBMA Responsible Gold Guidance	Industry Standard, FCA has oversight	LBMA, FCA

So whether your gold is in London or Zurich, pretty serious oversight is at play, but standards are enforced unevenly. (Don’t take my word; here’s an OECD explainer for the truly motivated.)

Simulated Case Study: A Cross-Border Tangle

Picture this: A US investor owns BAR (Graniteshares Gold Trust), its gold is held in London, and suddenly, a new UK rule (hypotheticals here!) says only gold sourced from specific mines is eligible for local trade. Now, if BAR didn’t pre-vet its sources per the LBMA standards, it could lose its “Good Delivery” status—which might mean premiums/discounts show up in the ETF price.

So, what happens if a Europe-based investor holds BAR and tries to redeem, but EU customs say “wait, prove provenance!” The ETF needs robust “verified trade” records (under EU Regulation 2017/821) or risk cargo holds at customs, extra documentation, delays, or, worst case, legal issues.

Honestly, this stuff rarely hits retail investors, but it’s why regulatory disclosures run for dozens of pages. See the actual BAR prospectus, p.12 and on.

What Do the Experts Think?

For this piece, I pinged two veteran gold investors via LinkedIn (won’t name names, NDA and all that). Both had the same advice: “Pick the biggest vehicle for tight spreads, unless you have very strong views on physical redemption or storage location.” As one said, “The main thing to watch for is real AUM and real daily trading. Fancy disclosures are worth it if you’re trading millions, but for the average investor, the big three are all but interchangeable.”

Sounds almost too simple, but real market data back this up: According to Morningstar ETF coverage, BAR, SGOL, and IAUM have nearly identical tracking error and security, but GLD has far higher volume and established history.

Personal Experiment: Oops, I Did It Again…

The first time I wanted gold, I bought GLD without double-checking the spread. Turns out, if you do a market order at the open, you might get a worse price. Rookie move! Even though GLD is liquid, SPDR’s own ETF trading best practices doc says “avoid illiquid times.” Learned: Always use limit orders—even in super-liquid ETFs.

When I finally chose IAUM for a small Roth IRA side bet, the price execution was smoother, but bid-ask was a little wider than for GLD/IAU—again, due to scale and volume. For my $2k, tiny difference, but if you go up in size, it’ll eat into returns.

Conclusion: So, Should You Go Beyond IAUM?

To sum up, there are reliable, low-cost alternatives to IAUM if you want exposure to gold. GLD for mega-scale liquidity and a long track record; IAU if you want a slightly lower fee and can tolerate a higher share price than IAUM; BAR and SGOL if you care about vault location or want ultra-low expense ratios; OUNZ if you’re excited by physical redemption.

Whatever you pick, just remember: The exact ETF fee isn’t the only thing that matters—liquidity, regulatory oversight, and redemption features can all mean more in tricky scenarios. My advice after muddling through multiple purchases: use limit orders, check real trading volume, and, if you truly panic about vault safety, read the prospectus or (better yet) check recent audits.

If you need official reassurance about gold ETFs’ legal standing or supply chain integrity, check resources from agencies like the SEC (SEC ETF FAQ) or the London Bullion Market Association standards for how vaults operate.

Final reflection? There’s no single perfect gold ETF. Do your own side-by-side, accept that you’ll make small mistakes, and focus on the variables that matter for your specific goals (trading a little vs. a lot, caring where your gold is stored, etc). For my next move, I’m going to experiment with a mix—some IAUM, some SGOL—just for fun (and maybe to have a story for my next dinner party).