AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L
Compare and contrast key facts about L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) and Invesco Physical Palladium (SPAP.L).
AUCO.L and SPAP.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. AUCO.L is a passively managed fund by L&G that tracks the performance of the STOXX Global Gold Miners Index. It was launched on Nov 6, 2008. SPAP.L is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Palladium. It was launched on Apr 13, 2011. Both AUCO.L and SPAP.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUCO.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF | 12.17% | 181.83% | 17.96% | 15.02% | -14.29% | -10.15% | 21.74% | 44.15% | -10.43% | 10.00% |
SPAP.L Invesco Physical Palladium | -5.43% | 75.03% | -19.28% | -38.03% | -5.67% | -20.37% | 23.23% | 53.29% | 17.53% | 56.28% |
Different Trading Currencies
AUCO.L is traded in USD, while SPAP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SPAP.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 12.17% return, which is significantly higher than SPAP.L's -5.43% return. Over the past 10 years, AUCO.L has outperformed SPAP.L with an annualized return of 19.80%, while SPAP.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.99% annualized return.
AUCO.L
- 1D
- 7.53%
- 1M
- -14.77%
- YTD
- 12.17%
- 6M
- 28.13%
- 1Y
- 117.52%
- 3Y*
- 55.66%
- 5Y*
- 28.66%
- 10Y*
- 19.80%
SPAP.L
- 1D
- 2.78%
- 1M
- -14.95%
- YTD
- -5.43%
- 6M
- 20.07%
- 1Y
- 50.96%
- 3Y*
- 0.47%
- 5Y*
- -11.00%
- 10Y*
- 9.99%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
AUCO.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than SPAP.L's 0.19% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L — Risk / Return Rank
AUCO.L
SPAP.L
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.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 Invesco Physical Palladium (SPAP.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 | SPAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.50 | 1.16 | +1.34 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.76 | 1.64 | +1.12 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.21 | +0.15 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.97 | 1.45 | +2.53 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.97 | 4.41 | +9.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AUCO.L | SPAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.50 | 1.16 | +1.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 | -0.26 | +1.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 | 0.26 | +0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 0.13 | +0.17 |
Correlation
The correlation between AUCO.L and SPAP.L is 0.36, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither AUCO.L nor SPAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AUCO.L drawdown since its inception was -78.40%, which is greater than SPAP.L's maximum drawdown of -71.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUCO.L and SPAP.L.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| AUCO.L | SPAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.40% | -70.89% | -7.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.56% | -35.27% | +4.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.36% | -70.89% | +21.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -54.49% | -70.89% | +16.40% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.34% | -51.70% | +35.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -42.76% | -26.79% | -15.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.69% | 11.40% | -2.71% |
Volatility
AUCO.L vs. SPAP.L - Volatility Comparison
L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) has a higher volatility of 18.73% compared to Invesco Physical Palladium (SPAP.L) at 12.39%. This indicates that AUCO.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SPAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| AUCO.L | SPAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.73% | 12.39% | +6.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 37.69% | 38.09% | -0.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.79% | 43.83% | +2.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.53% | 42.82% | -5.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.37% | 38.41% | -3.04% |