CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L
CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) and SGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - CMB1.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR, while SGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMB1.L returned 16.09%/yr vs 14.27%/yr for SGLN.L. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. CMB1.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLN.L.
Performance
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMB1.L achieves a 13.66% return, which is significantly higher than SGLN.L's 3.89% return. Over the past 10 years, CMB1.L has outperformed SGLN.L with an annualized return of 16.09%, while SGLN.L has yielded a comparatively lower 14.27% annualized return.
CMB1.L
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 5.18%
- YTD
- 13.66%
- 6M
- 17.10%
- 1Y
- 34.20%
- 3Y*
- 29.03%
- 5Y*
- 19.92%
- 10Y*
- 16.09%
SGLN.L
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- -1.36%
- YTD
- 3.89%
- 6M
- 5.42%
- 1Y
- 33.75%
- 3Y*
- 28.17%
- 5Y*
- 20.12%
- 10Y*
- 14.27%
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMB1.L iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) | 13.66% | 43.83% | 13.25% | 30.68% | -3.56% | 18.29% | 1.52% | 24.83% | -12.74% | 21.01% |
SGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 3.89% | 53.66% | 28.20% | 7.24% | 11.84% | -2.57% | 19.62% | 14.63% | 4.36% | 1.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMB1.L and SGLN.L is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011 | -0.01 |
The correlation between CMB1.L and SGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (5 years) to 0.16 (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
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
CMB1.L
SGLN.L
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.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.
| CMB1.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.29 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.30 | 1.91 | +1.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.03 | 5.05 | +6.98 |
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
| CMB1.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.26 | 1.45 | +0.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.11 | 1.23 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.82 | 0.90 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.55 | -0.08 |
Drawdowns
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMB1.L drawdown since its inception was -47.37%, which is greater than SGLN.L's maximum drawdown of -41.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMB1.L and SGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMB1.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.37% | -41.71% | -5.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.32% | -17.57% | +7.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.62% | -17.57% | +1.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.19% | -17.57% | -6.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.61% | -21.91% | -14.70% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.63% | -16.01% | +15.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.80% | -14.76% | +5.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.84% | 6.67% | -3.83% |
Volatility
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) is 4.47%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) has a volatility of 5.08%. This indicates that CMB1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMB1.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.47% | 5.08% | -0.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.15% | 20.08% | -7.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.06% | 23.19% | -8.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.00% | 16.30% | +1.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.52% | 15.78% | +3.74% |
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMB1.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.L's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMB1.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CMB1.L nor SGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CMB1.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SGLN.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CMB1.L.
CMB1.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while SGLN.L is Gold. CMB1.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CMB1.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for CMB1.L and SGLN.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