EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L
EIMI.L (iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF) and SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) are both exchange-traded funds - EIMI.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index, while SGLP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EIMI.L returned 10.60%/yr vs 12.42%/yr for SGLP.L. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EIMI.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLP.L.
Performance
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
EIMI.L is traded in USD, while SGLP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SGLP.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EIMI.L achieves a 22.83% return, which is significantly higher than SGLP.L's -2.23% return. Over the past 10 years, EIMI.L has underperformed SGLP.L with an annualized return of 10.60%, while SGLP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.42% annualized return.
EIMI.L
- 1D
- 3.53%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 22.83%
- 6M
- 26.10%
- 1Y
- 45.08%
- 3Y*
- 21.64%
- 5Y*
- 7.50%
- 10Y*
- 10.60%
SGLP.L
- 1D
- 2.69%
- 1M
- -9.63%
- YTD
- -2.23%
- 6M
- -1.73%
- 1Y
- 23.21%
- 3Y*
- 29.23%
- 5Y*
- 17.41%
- 10Y*
- 12.42%
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF | 22.83% | 32.16% | 7.36% | 11.03% | -19.67% | -0.65% | 18.80% | 16.37% | -14.18% | 36.94% |
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A | -2.23% | 65.19% | 26.00% | 12.92% | -0.12% | -3.76% | 23.67% | 19.25% | -1.60% | 11.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between EIMI.L and SGLP.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 | 0.30 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2014 | 0.14 |
Over the past year, EIMI.L and SGLP.L have become more correlated (0.38) than their long-term average of 0.14, 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
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L — Risk / Return Rank
EIMI.L
SGLP.L
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| EIMI.L | SGLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.19 | +0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.40 | 1.05 | +2.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.76 | 3.19 | +8.58 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EIMI.L drawdown since its inception was -38.73%, smaller than the maximum SGLP.L drawdown of -66.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EIMI.L and SGLP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EIMI.L | SGLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.73% | -66.38% | +27.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.66% | -22.75% | +10.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.44% | -22.75% | +5.31% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.41% | -22.75% | -12.66% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.73% | -22.75% | -15.98% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.75% | -20.68% | +16.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.99% | -39.76% | +25.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.66% | 7.49% | -3.83% |
Volatility
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) has a higher volatility of 8.37% compared to Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) at 7.18%. This indicates that EIMI.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SGLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EIMI.L | SGLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.37% | 7.18% | +1.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.62% | 21.60% | -3.98% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.94% | 24.75% | -4.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.46% | 22.64% | -4.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.20% | 18.77% | +0.43% |
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EIMI.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLP.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
EIMI.L vs. SGLP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither EIMI.L nor SGLP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
EIMI.L and SGLP.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.
On fees, SGLP.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SGLP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for EIMI.L.
EIMI.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while SGLP.L is Precious Metals. EIMI.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index, while SGLP.L tracks Gold. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EIMI.L and 0.12% for SGLP.L.
Find the right allocation for EIMI.L and SGLP.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