PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) and HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUCP.L achieves a -0.57% return, which is significantly lower than ESGP.L's 2.21% return.


AUCP.L

1D
0.71%
1M
-0.45%
YTD
-0.57%
6M
4.66%
1Y
65.77%
3Y*
46.06%
5Y*
23.58%
10Y*
16.41%

ESGP.L

1D
0.62%
1M
1.18%
YTD
2.21%
6M
7.21%
1Y
62.77%
3Y*
33.61%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
AUCP.L
L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF
-0.57%161.99%20.20%8.69%-4.04%-1.59%
ESGP.L
HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF
2.21%136.71%3.17%-0.39%2.14%-3.44%

Correlation

The correlation between AUCP.L and ESGP.L is 0.95 - 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

0.95

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2021

0.92

The correlation between AUCP.L and ESGP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AUCP.L
ESGP.L

Basic Materials

100.0%
100.0%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

AUCP.L
100.0%
ESGP.L
100.0%

Communication Services

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Consumer Defensive

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Energy

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Financial Services

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Healthcare

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Industrials

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Real Estate

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Technology

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Utilities

AUCP.L

-

ESGP.L

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUCP.L
AUCP.L Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
AUCP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUCP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUCP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
AUCP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUCP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

ESGP.L
ESGP.L Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
ESGP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESGP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESGP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
ESGP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESGP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) and HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.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.


AUCP.LESGP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

0.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.26

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.21

2.18

+0.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.70

5.45

+0.24

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUCP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is comparable to the ESGP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUCP.L and ESGP.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AUCP.LESGP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.49

1.53

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.26

0.60

-0.34

Drawdowns

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUCP.L drawdown since its inception was -77.57%, which is greater than ESGP.L's maximum drawdown of -36.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUCP.L and ESGP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AUCP.LESGP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.57%

-36.54%

-41.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-29.56%

-28.67%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.56%

-28.67%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.67%

-24.33%

-1.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-35.74%

-13.50%

-22.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.51%

11.48%

+0.03%

Volatility

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) is 13.97%, while HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.L) has a volatility of 15.32%. This indicates that AUCP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ESGP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AUCP.LESGP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.97%

15.32%

-1.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

34.06%

32.59%

+1.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

43.95%

40.84%

+3.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

35.99%

33.19%

+2.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.66%

33.19%

+1.47%

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUCP.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than ESGP.L's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

AUCP.L vs. ESGP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AUCP.L nor ESGP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, AUCP.L and ESGP.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.

On fees, AUCP.L is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

AUCP.L is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ESGP.L.

AUCP.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners, while ESGP.L tracks EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for AUCP.L and 0.60% for ESGP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AUCP.L and ESGP.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer