AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AIGC.L (WisdomTree Broad Commodities) and GLDW.L (WisdomTree Core Physical Gold) are both exchange-traded funds - AIGC.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity, while GLDW.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AIGC.L returned 10.38%/yr vs 18.61%/yr for GLDW.L. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AIGC.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GLDW.L.

Performance

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree Broad Commodities (AIGC.L) and WisdomTree Core Physical Gold (GLDW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

AIGC.L is traded in USD, while GLDW.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the GLDW.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIGC.L achieves a 24.32% return, which is significantly higher than GLDW.L's 3.71% return.

AIGC.L

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: -4.07%
• YTD: 24.32%
• 6M: 24.87%
• 1Y: 37.57%
• 3Y*: 14.90%
• 5Y*: 10.38%
• 10Y*: 5.99%

GLDW.L

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -2.18%
• YTD: 3.71%
• 6M: 6.15%
• 1Y: 32.41%
• 3Y*: 31.46%
• 5Y*: 18.61%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
AIGC.L WisdomTree Broad Commodities	24.32%	16.03%	2.05%	-6.41%	13.22%	15.05%
GLDW.L WisdomTree Core Physical Gold	3.71%	65.15%	26.05%	12.92%	-0.13%	6.27%

Correlation

The correlation between AIGC.L and GLDW.L is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2021	0.32

Return for Risk

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AIGC.L

AIGC.L Risk / Return Rank: 70
AIGC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
AIGC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
AIGC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 68
AIGC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
AIGC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 67

GLDW.L

GLDW.L Risk / Return Rank: 40
GLDW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
GLDW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
GLDW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 47
GLDW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
GLDW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 34

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Broad Commodities (AIGC.L) and WisdomTree Core Physical Gold (GLDW.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	AIGC.L	GLDW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	1.34	+0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	1.79	+0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.25	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.28	1.82	+3.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.07	4.75	+7.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIGC.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is higher than the GLDW.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIGC.L and GLDW.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AIGC.L	GLDW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.19	1.34	+0.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69	1.07	-0.39
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.02	1.16	-1.18

Drawdowns

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIGC.L drawdown since its inception was -75.92%, which is greater than GLDW.L's maximum drawdown of -21.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIGC.L and GLDW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIGC.L	GLDW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.92%	-21.42%	-54.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.09%	-17.74%	+10.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.23%	-17.74%	+6.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.98%	-21.42%	-5.56%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.42%	-15.82%	-21.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-51.02%	-5.39%	-45.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	6.81%	-3.71%

Volatility

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Volatility Comparison

WisdomTree Broad Commodities (AIGC.L) and WisdomTree Core Physical Gold (GLDW.L) have volatilities of 5.88% and 5.73%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIGC.L	GLDW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.88%	5.73%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.18%	20.82%	-5.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.07%	24.07%	-7.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.14%	17.35%	+0.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.76%	17.18%	-1.42%

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIGC.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDW.L's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIGC.L vs. GLDW.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AIGC.L nor GLDW.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIGC.L and GLDW.L in my portfolio?

AIGC.L and GLDW.L have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AIGC.L or GLDW.L?

On fees, GLDW.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIGC.L or GLDW.L?

GLDW.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for AIGC.L.

What is the main difference between AIGC.L and GLDW.L?

AIGC.L is categorized as Commodities, while GLDW.L is Precious Metals. AIGC.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity, while GLDW.L tracks Gold. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for AIGC.L and 0.12% for GLDW.L.