PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUG.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMUG.L achieves a -4.61% return, which is significantly higher than AUCO.L's -15.05% return.


EMUG.L

1D
-2.86%
1M
-3.42%
6M
-4.66%
YTD
-4.61%
1Y
-0.64%
3Y*
3.42%
5Y*
0.93%
10Y*

AUCO.L

1D
-3.99%
1M
-15.23%
6M
-23.89%
YTD
-15.05%
1Y
46.48%
3Y*
39.74%
5Y*
22.49%
10Y*
11.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
EMUG.L
L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
-4.61%1.10%7.35%1.04%-0.88%-25.37%
AUCO.L
L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF
-15.05%161.75%20.02%9.27%-4.11%-7.76%

Correlation

The correlation between EMUG.L and AUCO.L is -0.20, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.20

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

-0.18

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

-0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2021

-0.17

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

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMUG.L
EMUG.L Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
EMUG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMUG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMUG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
EMUG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMUG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank

AUCO.L
AUCO.L Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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.

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUG.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.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.


EMUG.LAUCO.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.01

1.18

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.00

1.24

-1.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.01

2.96

-2.95

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMUG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.00, which is lower than the AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMUG.L and AUCO.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...

Drawdowns

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMUG.L drawdown since its inception was -30.45%, smaller than the maximum AUCO.L drawdown of -77.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMUG.L and AUCO.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMUG.LAUCO.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.45%

-77.54%

+47.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.95%

-37.18%

+30.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.64%

-37.18%

+28.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.29%

-39.29%

+28.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.67%

-36.60%

+13.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.29%

-34.38%

+10.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.32%

15.68%

-12.36%

Volatility

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUG.L) is 3.48%, while L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) has a volatility of 16.14%. This indicates that EMUG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AUCO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMUG.LAUCO.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.48%

16.14%

-12.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.25%

38.38%

-33.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.94%

47.49%

-40.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.08%

36.64%

-28.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.93%

34.19%

-20.26%

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMUG.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than AUCO.L's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMUG.L vs. AUCO.L - Dividend Comparison

EMUG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.27%, while AUCO.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
AUCO.L
L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
EMUG.L
L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
3.27%5.99%4.86%4.67%3.61%1.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMUG.L and AUCO.L have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EMUG.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EMUG.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCO.L.

EMUG.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while AUCO.L is Gold. EMUG.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while AUCO.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EMUG.L and 0.55% for AUCO.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMUG.L and AUCO.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