AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO
AUCP.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) is Precious Metals fund tracking the STOXX Global Gold Miners, while PHYS.TO (Sprott Physical Gold Trust) is a stock. Over the past 5 years, AUCP.L returned 23.58%/yr vs 18.90%/yr for PHYS.TO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
AUCP.L is traded in GBp, while PHYS.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the PHYS.TO 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 lower than PHYS.TO's 2.84% 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%
PHYS.TO
- 1D
- 0.75%
- 1M
- -0.94%
- YTD
- 2.84%
- 6M
- 4.39%
- 1Y
- 32.54%
- 3Y*
- 26.77%
- 5Y*
- 18.90%
- 10Y*
- —
AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUCP.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF | -0.57% | 161.99% | 20.20% | 8.69% | -4.04% | -8.91% | 17.60% | 39.53% | -0.56% |
PHYS.TO Sprott Physical Gold Trust | 2.84% | 52.17% | 28.77% | 7.51% | 9.58% | -3.77% | 20.17% | 13.25% | 4.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between AUCP.L and PHYS.TO is 0.63, 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 | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2018 | 0.54 |
The correlation between AUCP.L and PHYS.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. PHYS.TO — Risk / Return Rank
AUCP.L
PHYS.TO
AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) and Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO). 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 | PHYS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.25 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.21 | 1.76 | +0.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.70 | 4.35 | +1.35 |
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 | PHYS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.49 | 1.25 | +0.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 1.11 | -0.46 |
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 | 0.57 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AUCP.L drawdown since its inception was -77.57%, which is greater than PHYS.TO's maximum drawdown of -29.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUCP.L and PHYS.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AUCP.L | PHYS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.57% | -29.42% | -48.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.56% | -18.53% | -11.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.56% | -18.53% | -11.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.38% | -18.53% | -20.85% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.67% | -17.03% | -8.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.74% | -6.58% | -29.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.51% | 7.50% | +4.01% |
Volatility
AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO - Volatility Comparison
L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) has a higher volatility of 13.97% compared to Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) at 5.25%. This indicates that AUCP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PHYS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AUCP.L | PHYS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.97% | 5.25% | +8.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 34.06% | 22.14% | +11.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.95% | 26.15% | +17.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.99% | 17.08% | +18.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.66% | 26.95% | +7.71% |
Dividends
AUCP.L vs. PHYS.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither AUCP.L nor PHYS.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
AUCP.L and PHYS.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Find the right allocation for AUCP.L and PHYS.TO
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