COPG.L vs. INRG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

COPG.L (Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF USD Acc) and INRG.L (iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - COPG.L is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Copper Miners Total Return Index, while INRG.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, COPG.L returned 34.51%/yr vs 5.64%/yr for INRG.L. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF USD Acc (COPG.L) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

COPG.L is traded in GBP, while INRG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the INRG.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COPG.L achieves a 24.91% return, which is significantly lower than INRG.L's 39.09% return.

COPG.L

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: 15.82%
• YTD: 24.91%
• 6M: 35.76%
• 1Y: 119.81%
• 3Y*: 34.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

INRG.L

• 1D: -2.01%
• 1M: 8.39%
• YTD: 39.09%
• 6M: 35.51%
• 1Y: 82.63%
• 3Y*: 5.64%
• 5Y*: 2.72%
• 10Y*: 12.64%

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

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
COPG.L Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF USD Acc	24.91%	82.05%	3.66%	3.03%	14.35%	-1.92%
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	39.09%	34.75%	-24.39%	-23.83%	5.52%	-5.66%

Correlation

The correlation between COPG.L and INRG.L is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2021	0.42

Return for Risk

COPG.L vs. INRG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

COPG.L

COPG.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
COPG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
COPG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
COPG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 76
COPG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
COPG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 77

INRG.L

INRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 91
INRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
INRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
INRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 87
INRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
INRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF USD Acc (COPG.L) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.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.

	COPG.L	INRG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.14	3.42	-0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	4.38	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.53	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.53	6.64	-2.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.57	19.87	-5.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COPG.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is comparable to the INRG.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COPG.L and INRG.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

	COPG.L	INRG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14	3.42	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	0.02	+0.75

Drawdowns

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COPG.L drawdown since its inception was -38.84%, smaller than the maximum INRG.L drawdown of -85.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COPG.L and INRG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	COPG.L	INRG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.84%	-85.09%	+46.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.29%	-12.38%	-13.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.84%	-44.29%	+5.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-57.38%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.47%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.64%	-27.35%	+21.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.96%	-56.54%	+42.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.19%	4.15%	+4.04%

Volatility

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Volatility Comparison

Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF USD Acc (COPG.L) has a higher volatility of 14.11% compared to iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) at 9.58%. This indicates that COPG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COPG.L	INRG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.11%	9.58%	+4.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.19%	17.61%	+14.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.96%	24.04%	+13.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.82%	24.80%	+9.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.82%	25.33%	+8.49%

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both COPG.L and INRG.L have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

COPG.L vs. INRG.L - Dividend Comparison

COPG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while INRG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COPG.L Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF USD Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	1.09%	1.77%	1.58%	1.00%	0.62%	1.01%	0.61%	2.05%	3.68%	3.69%	3.65%	3.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COPG.L and INRG.L in my portfolio?

COPG.L and INRG.L have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, COPG.L or INRG.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, COPG.L or INRG.L?

COPG.L and INRG.L have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

What is the main difference between COPG.L and INRG.L?

COPG.L is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while INRG.L is Energy Equities. COPG.L tracks Solactive Global Copper Miners Total Return Index, while INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares.