AUCP.L vs. GDXJ
AUCP.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AUCP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the STOXX Global Gold Miners, while GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AUCP.L returned 16.41%/yr vs 13.82%/yr for GDXJ. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AUCP.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for GDXJ.
Performance
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
AUCP.L is traded in GBp, while GDXJ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GDXJ values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AUCP.L achieves a -0.57% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -1.25% return. Over the past 10 years, AUCP.L has outperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 16.41%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively lower 13.82% annualized 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%
GDXJ
- 1D
- 0.92%
- 1M
- -0.21%
- YTD
- -1.25%
- 6M
- 6.27%
- 1Y
- 66.96%
- 3Y*
- 42.51%
- 5Y*
- 18.95%
- 10Y*
- 13.82%
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUCP.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF | -0.57% | 161.99% | 20.20% | 8.69% | -4.04% | -8.91% | 17.60% | 39.53% | -5.63% | 0.57% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | -1.25% | 152.89% | 17.69% | 1.77% | -4.37% | -20.50% | 26.57% | 35.10% | -5.75% | -1.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between AUCP.L and GDXJ is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2009 | 0.58 |
The correlation between AUCP.L and GDXJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (all time) to 0.76 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
AUCP.L
GDXJ
Basic Materials
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
AUCP.L
GDXJ
Communication Services
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Consumer Cyclical
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Consumer Defensive
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Energy
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Financial Services
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Healthcare
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Industrials
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Real Estate
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Technology
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
Utilities
AUCP.L
-
GDXJ
-
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. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank
AUCP.L
GDXJ
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.L | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.25 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.21 | 2.09 | +0.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.70 | 5.22 | +0.48 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AUCP.L | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.49 | 1.41 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 0.50 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 | 0.33 | +0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.26 | 0.09 | +0.17 |
Drawdowns
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AUCP.L drawdown since its inception was -77.57%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -87.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUCP.L and GDXJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AUCP.L | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.57% | -87.31% | +9.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.56% | -32.22% | +2.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.56% | -32.22% | +2.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.38% | -37.40% | -1.98% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.72% | -51.61% | +5.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.67% | -28.02% | +2.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.74% | -55.60% | +19.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.51% | 12.88% | -1.37% |
Volatility
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) is 13.97%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 15.79%. This indicates that AUCP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AUCP.L | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.97% | 15.79% | -1.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 34.06% | 39.34% | -5.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.95% | 47.78% | -3.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.99% | 37.84% | -1.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.66% | 42.20% | -7.54% |
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
AUCP.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
AUCP.L vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison
AUCP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GDXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.37%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUCP.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | 2.37% | 2.33% | 2.61% | 0.72% | 0.51% | 1.78% | 1.58% | 0.39% | 0.45% | 0.03% | 4.78% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AUCP.L and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GDXJ is cheaper at 0.52% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GDXJ is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCP.L.
AUCP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while GDXJ is Gold. AUCP.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners, while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for AUCP.L and 0.52% for GDXJ.
Find the right allocation for AUCP.L and GDXJ
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