AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AXQT.DE (AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc) and RMAU.L (The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities) are both exchange-traded funds - AXQT.DE is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Climate Paris Aligned, while RMAU.L is a Commodities fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, AXQT.DE returned 67.57% vs 28.12% for RMAU.L. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AXQT.DE charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for RMAU.L.

Performance

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc (AXQT.DE) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

AXQT.DE is traded in EUR, while RMAU.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RMAU.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AXQT.DE achieves a 40.98% return, which is significantly higher than RMAU.L's 2.28% return.

AXQT.DE

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: 3.81%
• YTD: 40.98%
• 6M: 43.57%
• 1Y: 67.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RMAU.L

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: -6.12%
• YTD: 2.28%
• 6M: 4.02%
• 1Y: 28.12%
• 3Y*: 26.86%
• 5Y*: 19.03%
• 10Y*: —

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

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AXQT.DE AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc	40.98%	15.03%
RMAU.L The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities	2.28%	33.23%

Correlation

The correlation between AXQT.DE and RMAU.L is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2025	0.19

Return for Risk

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AXQT.DE

AXQT.DE Risk / Return Rank: 93
AXQT.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
AXQT.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
AXQT.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 93
AXQT.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
AXQT.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 91

RMAU.L

RMAU.L Risk / Return Rank: 35
RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
RMAU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
RMAU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 39
RMAU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
RMAU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc (AXQT.DE) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.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.

	AXQT.DE	RMAU.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.62	1.16	+2.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.47	1.58	+2.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.23	+0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.01	1.59	+4.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.04	4.09	+17.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AXQT.DE Sharpe Ratio is 3.62, which is higher than the RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AXQT.DE and RMAU.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

	AXQT.DE	RMAU.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.62	1.16	+2.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.13	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.20	0.93	+1.27

Drawdowns

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AXQT.DE drawdown since its inception was -18.65%, roughly equal to the maximum RMAU.L drawdown of -18.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AXQT.DE and RMAU.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AXQT.DE	RMAU.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.65%	-18.25%	-0.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.49%	-17.61%	+6.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.61%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.23%	-17.50%	+15.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.07%	-6.07%	+3.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.14%	6.86%	-3.72%

Volatility

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Volatility Comparison

AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc (AXQT.DE) has a higher volatility of 8.70% compared to The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) at 5.56%. This indicates that AXQT.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RMAU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AXQT.DE	RMAU.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.70%	5.56%	+3.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.43%	21.31%	-4.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.11%	24.19%	-5.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.01%	16.83%	+3.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.01%	17.06%	+2.95%

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AXQT.DE has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAU.L's 0.22% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

AXQT.DE vs. RMAU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AXQT.DE nor RMAU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AXQT.DE and RMAU.L in my portfolio?

AXQT.DE and RMAU.L have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AXQT.DE or RMAU.L?

On fees, RMAU.L is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AXQT.DE or RMAU.L?

RMAU.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for AXQT.DE.

What is the main difference between AXQT.DE and RMAU.L?

AXQT.DE is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while RMAU.L is Commodities. AXQT.DE tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Climate Paris Aligned, while RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price. They also come from different issuers: AXA IM and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for AXQT.DE and 0.22% for RMAU.L.