AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AUCO.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) and GDGB.L (VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF) are both Gold funds - AUCO.L tracks the STOXX Global Gold Miners Index while GDGB.L tracks the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AUCO.L returned 22.29%/yr vs 18.94%/yr for GDGB.L. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AUCO.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for GDGB.L.

Performance

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

AUCO.L is traded in USD, while GDGB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the GDGB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUCO.L achieves a -0.69% return, which is significantly lower than GDGB.L's 0.67% return.

AUCO.L

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: -7.52%
• YTD: -0.69%
• 6M: 4.86%
• 1Y: 62.92%
• 3Y*: 49.95%
• 5Y*: 22.29%
• 10Y*: 15.56%

GDGB.L

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -6.07%
• YTD: 0.67%
• 6M: 7.05%
• 1Y: 63.76%
• 3Y*: 41.23%
• 5Y*: 18.94%
• 10Y*: —

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

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AUCO.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF	-0.69%	181.83%	17.96%	15.02%	-14.29%	-10.15%	21.74%	44.15%	-10.43%	-0.49%
GDGB.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF	0.67%	156.24%	9.38%	9.16%	-7.97%	-11.28%	23.23%	44.43%	-10.42%	1.64%

Correlation

The correlation between AUCO.L and GDGB.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2017	0.95

The correlation between AUCO.L and GDGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AUCO.L	GDGB.L
Basic Materials	100.0%	100.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUCO.L

AUCO.L Risk / Return Rank: 38
AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
AUCO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
AUCO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 37
AUCO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
AUCO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 36

GDGB.L

GDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 42
GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
GDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
GDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 41
GDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.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.

	AUCO.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.45	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.89	1.93	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.24	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	2.12	-0.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.42	5.40	+0.02
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUCO.L and GDGB.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

	AUCO.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	1.45	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58	0.53	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.27	0.50	-0.23

Drawdowns

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUCO.L drawdown since its inception was -78.40%, which is greater than GDGB.L's maximum drawdown of -50.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUCO.L and GDGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUCO.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.40%	-50.68%	-27.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.56%	-29.71%	-0.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.56%	-29.71%	-0.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.64%	-46.27%	-2.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.49%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.94%	-25.04%	-0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.54%	-17.79%	-24.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.83%	11.71%	+0.12%

Volatility

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) has a higher volatility of 15.82% compared to VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L) at 15.01%. This indicates that AUCO.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GDGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUCO.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.82%	15.01%	+0.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.24%	34.89%	+1.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	45.42%	43.51%	+1.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.11%	35.42%	+2.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.36%	34.18%	+1.18%

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUCO.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than GDGB.L's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

AUCO.L vs. GDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AUCO.L nor GDGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUCO.L and GDGB.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, AUCO.L and GDGB.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, AUCO.L or GDGB.L?

On fees, GDGB.L is cheaper at 0.53% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUCO.L or GDGB.L?

GDGB.L is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCO.L.

What is the main difference between AUCO.L and GDGB.L?

AUCO.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners Index, while GDGB.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: L&G and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for AUCO.L and 0.53% for GDGB.L.