PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World ESG Enhanced CTB UCITS ETF USD Inc (EEWD.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EEWD.L is traded in USD, while SGLN.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SGLN.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEWD.L achieves a 9.23% return, which is significantly higher than SGLN.L's 3.64% return.


EEWD.L

1D
0.04%
1M
2.53%
YTD
9.23%
6M
10.09%
1Y
23.79%
3Y*
19.45%
5Y*
10.52%
10Y*

SGLN.L

1D
0.76%
1M
-4.72%
YTD
3.64%
6M
5.95%
1Y
33.21%
3Y*
31.47%
5Y*
18.86%
10Y*
13.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EEWD.L
iShares MSCI World ESG Enhanced CTB UCITS ETF USD Inc
9.23%19.23%18.35%23.17%-20.23%22.70%17.66%15.77%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
3.64%65.25%26.06%12.89%-0.12%-3.46%23.28%17.68%

Correlation

The correlation between EEWD.L and SGLN.L is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.18

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 13, 2019

0.09

The correlation between EEWD.L and SGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (all time) to 0.28 (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

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEWD.L
EEWD.L Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
EEWD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEWD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEWD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
EEWD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEWD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

SGLN.L
SGLN.L Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World ESG Enhanced CTB UCITS ETF USD Inc (EEWD.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.


EEWD.LSGLN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.25

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

1.85

+0.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.80

4.75

+7.06

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEWD.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is higher than the SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEWD.L and SGLN.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EEWD.LSGLN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.00

1.33

+0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

1.08

-0.41

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

0.46

+0.33

Drawdowns

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEWD.L drawdown since its inception was -33.48%, smaller than the maximum SGLN.L drawdown of -45.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEWD.L and SGLN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEWD.LSGLN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.48%

-45.21%

+11.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.67%

-17.50%

+8.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.00%

-17.50%

+0.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.90%

-21.27%

-6.63%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-21.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.45%

-15.89%

+15.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.70%

-19.80%

+14.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.05%

6.83%

-4.78%

Volatility

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI World ESG Enhanced CTB UCITS ETF USD Inc (EEWD.L) is 3.42%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) has a volatility of 5.74%. This indicates that EEWD.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


EEWD.LSGLN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.42%

5.74%

-2.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.23%

21.04%

-11.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.05%

24.26%

-12.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.84%

17.52%

-1.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.33%

15.86%

+1.47%

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEWD.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

EEWD.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
EEWD.L
iShares MSCI World ESG Enhanced CTB UCITS ETF USD Inc
1.09%1.19%1.39%1.59%1.82%1.29%1.35%1.47%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EEWD.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of 0.28, 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 0.20% for EEWD.L.

EEWD.L is categorized as Global Equities, while SGLN.L is Gold. EEWD.L tracks MSCI World ESG Enhanced Focus CTB Index, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for EEWD.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EEWD.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