CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L
CEMG.L (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and IGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - CEMG.L is a Consumer Staples Equities fund tracking the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while IGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L returned 3.80%/yr vs 13.42%/yr for IGLN.L. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEMG.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IGLN.L.
Performance
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEMG.L achieves a -7.56% return, which is significantly lower than IGLN.L's 3.70% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L has underperformed IGLN.L with an annualized return of 3.80%, while IGLN.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.42% annualized return.
CEMG.L
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.99%
- YTD
- -7.56%
- 6M
- -8.07%
- 1Y
- -6.47%
- 3Y*
- 5.85%
- 5Y*
- -3.07%
- 10Y*
- 3.80%
IGLN.L
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- -2.35%
- YTD
- 3.70%
- 6M
- 6.03%
- 1Y
- 32.37%
- 3Y*
- 31.55%
- 5Y*
- 18.61%
- 10Y*
- 13.42%
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMG.L iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | -7.56% | 13.16% | 10.30% | 5.13% | -21.91% | -9.64% | 26.92% | 19.93% | -19.87% | 40.62% |
IGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 3.70% | 64.92% | 26.14% | 13.44% | -0.09% | -4.03% | 24.16% | 18.28% | -1.31% | 11.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMG.L and IGLN.L is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2014 | 0.13 |
Over the past year, CEMG.L and IGLN.L have become more correlated (0.39) than their long-term average of 0.13, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
CEMG.L
IGLN.L
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.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.
| CEMG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.29 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.25 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.43 | 1.86 | -2.29 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.98 | 4.79 | -5.77 |
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
| CEMG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.44 | 1.30 | -1.74 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.15 | 1.07 | -1.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | 0.86 | -0.67 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.46 | -0.31 |
Drawdowns
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.10%, roughly equal to the maximum IGLN.L drawdown of -45.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMG.L and IGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEMG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.10% | -45.24% | -0.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.90% | -17.36% | +2.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.50% | -17.36% | +1.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.17% | -21.15% | -21.02% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.10% | -21.15% | -24.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.17% | -15.66% | -6.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.32% | -19.80% | +3.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.61% | 6.74% | -0.13% |
Volatility
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) is 4.47%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.L) has a volatility of 6.36%. This indicates that CEMG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEMG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.47% | 6.36% | -1.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.10% | 21.73% | -9.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.62% | 24.78% | -10.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.36% | 17.36% | +3.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.49% | 15.54% | +3.95% |
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMG.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IGLN.L's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEMG.L vs. IGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEMG.L nor IGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CEMG.L and IGLN.L have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IGLN.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CEMG.L.
CEMG.L is categorized as Consumer Staples Equities, while IGLN.L is Gold. CEMG.L tracks Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while IGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CEMG.L and 0.25% for IGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for CEMG.L and IGLN.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