CIND.L vs. IGLN.L
CIND.L (iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc) and IGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - CIND.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, while IGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CIND.L returned 12.77%/yr vs 13.40%/yr for IGLN.L. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CIND.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IGLN.L.
Performance
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIND.L achieves a 5.75% return, which is significantly higher than IGLN.L's 3.00% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CIND.L having a 12.77% annualized return and IGLN.L not far ahead at 13.40%.
CIND.L
- 1D
- -0.61%
- 1M
- 2.56%
- YTD
- 5.75%
- 6M
- 7.17%
- 1Y
- 21.24%
- 3Y*
- 16.20%
- 5Y*
- 9.37%
- 10Y*
- 12.77%
IGLN.L
- 1D
- -1.45%
- 1M
- -4.23%
- YTD
- 3.00%
- 6M
- 5.09%
- 1Y
- 32.44%
- 3Y*
- 31.11%
- 5Y*
- 18.45%
- 10Y*
- 13.40%
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIND.L iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc | 5.75% | 14.46% | 14.71% | 15.66% | -7.56% | 20.97% | 8.76% | 24.22% | -4.90% | 27.62% |
IGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 3.00% | 64.92% | 26.14% | 13.44% | -0.09% | -4.03% | 24.16% | 18.28% | -1.31% | 11.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIND.L and IGLN.L is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 28, 2012 | 0.00 |
Over the past year, CIND.L and IGLN.L have become more correlated (0.26) than their long-term average of 0.00, 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
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
CIND.L
IGLN.L
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.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.
| CIND.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.25 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | 1.86 | +0.38 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.13 | 4.85 | +3.28 |
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
| CIND.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.75 | 1.30 | +0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 1.06 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 | 0.86 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.83 | 0.45 | +0.38 |
Drawdowns
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIND.L drawdown since its inception was -36.68%, smaller than the maximum IGLN.L drawdown of -45.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIND.L and IGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIND.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.68% | -45.24% | +8.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.44% | -17.36% | +7.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.44% | -17.36% | +0.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.90% | -21.15% | +1.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.68% | -21.15% | -15.53% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.61% | -16.23% | +15.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.67% | -19.80% | +16.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.61% | 6.66% | -4.05% |
Volatility
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) is 3.18%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.L) has a volatility of 6.40%. This indicates that CIND.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
| CIND.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.18% | 6.40% | -3.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.08% | 21.73% | -12.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.13% | 24.79% | -12.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.37% | 17.37% | -3.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.98% | 15.54% | +0.44% |
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIND.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than IGLN.L's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIND.L vs. IGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CIND.L nor IGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CIND.L and IGLN.L have a correlation of 0.26, 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 0.33% for CIND.L.
CIND.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while IGLN.L is Gold. CIND.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while IGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CIND.L and 0.25% for IGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for CIND.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