CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L
CLMP.L (HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF) and RMAU.L (The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities) are both exchange-traded funds - CLMP.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while RMAU.L is a Commodities fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CLMP.L returned 0.10%/yr vs 19.56%/yr for RMAU.L. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLMP.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for RMAU.L.
Performance
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CLMP.L is traded in GBp, while RMAU.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RMAU.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLMP.L achieves a 19.42% return, which is significantly higher than RMAU.L's 3.41% return.
CLMP.L
- 1D
- 0.93%
- 1M
- 8.64%
- YTD
- 19.42%
- 6M
- 18.50%
- 1Y
- 45.03%
- 3Y*
- 5.01%
- 5Y*
- 0.10%
- 10Y*
- —
RMAU.L
- 1D
- -1.19%
- 1M
- -3.16%
- YTD
- 3.41%
- 6M
- 4.60%
- 1Y
- 33.22%
- 3Y*
- 27.70%
- 5Y*
- 19.56%
- 10Y*
- —
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLMP.L HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF | 19.42% | 17.77% | -15.12% | -1.33% | -19.28% | 6.67% | 6.79% |
RMAU.L The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities | 3.41% | 52.84% | 28.16% | 7.63% | 11.68% | -3.23% | -0.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLMP.L 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2020 | 0.07 |
The correlation between CLMP.L and RMAU.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (5 years) to 0.21 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank
CLMP.L
RMAU.L
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF (CLMP.L) 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.
| CLMP.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.41 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.27 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.51 | 1.81 | -0.29 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.40 | 4.98 | -2.58 |
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
| CLMP.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 | 1.37 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 | 1.17 | -1.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.04 | 0.80 | -0.76 |
Drawdowns
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLMP.L drawdown since its inception was -48.75%, which is greater than RMAU.L's maximum drawdown of -23.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLMP.L and RMAU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLMP.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.75% | -23.24% | -25.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.66% | -18.32% | -11.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.47% | -18.32% | -22.15% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.75% | -18.32% | -30.43% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.51% | -16.61% | +3.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.78% | -6.61% | -17.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.71% | 6.66% | +12.05% |
Volatility
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Volatility Comparison
HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF (CLMP.L) has a higher volatility of 6.55% compared to The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) at 6.12%. This indicates that CLMP.L'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLMP.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.55% | 6.12% | +0.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.14% | 21.27% | -8.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.48% | 24.11% | +22.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.89% | 17.04% | +17.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.13% | 20.71% | +13.42% |
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLMP.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAU.L's 0.22% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLMP.L vs. RMAU.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CLMP.L nor RMAU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CLMP.L 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.
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.
RMAU.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CLMP.L.
CLMP.L is categorized as Global Equities, while RMAU.L is Commodities. CLMP.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CLMP.L and 0.22% for RMAU.L.
Find the right allocation for CLMP.L and RMAU.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