ESES.L vs. SGLP.L
ESES.L (Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF) and SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) are both exchange-traded funds - ESES.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF, while SGLP.L is a Gold fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ESES.L returned 7.51%/yr vs 17.81%/yr for SGLP.L. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESES.L achieves a 22.99% return, which is significantly higher than SGLP.L's -6.33% return.
ESES.L
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- -5.75%
- 6M
- 17.36%
- YTD
- 22.99%
- 1Y
- 39.41%
- 3Y*
- 18.98%
- 5Y*
- 7.51%
- 10Y*
- —
SGLP.L
- 1D
- -1.60%
- 1M
- -7.47%
- 6M
- -12.71%
- YTD
- -6.33%
- 1Y
- 20.56%
- 3Y*
- 26.02%
- 5Y*
- 17.81%
- 10Y*
- 11.36%
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESES.L Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF | 22.99% | 24.05% | 7.54% | 2.94% | -11.14% | 6,848.44% |
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A | -6.33% | 53.60% | 28.14% | 7.26% | 11.83% | 3.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESES.L and SGLP.L is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2021 | 0.16 |
The correlation between ESES.L and SGLP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (all time) to 0.32 (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
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L — Risk / Return Rank
ESES.L
SGLP.L
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF (ESES.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.
| ESES.L | SGLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.17 | +0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.64 | 0.84 | +2.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.46 | 2.08 | +9.37 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESES.L drawdown since its inception was -23.59%, smaller than the maximum SGLP.L drawdown of -63.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESES.L and SGLP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESES.L | SGLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.59% | -63.75% | +40.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.79% | -24.29% | +13.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.59% | -24.29% | +0.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.59% | -24.29% | +0.70% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.29% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.86% | -24.29% | +16.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.52% | -31.67% | +21.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.43% | 9.84% | -6.41% |
Volatility
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF (ESES.L) has a higher volatility of 7.50% compared to Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) at 6.71%. This indicates that ESES.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
| ESES.L | SGLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.50% | 6.71% | +0.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.04% | 21.07% | -4.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.04% | 24.32% | -5.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.66% | 21.89% | -0.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3,197.93% | 18.29% | +3,179.64% |
Dividends
ESES.L vs. SGLP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ESES.L nor SGLP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
ESES.L and SGLP.L have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ESES.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while SGLP.L is Gold. ESES.L tracks Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF, while SGLP.L tracks Gold.
Find the right allocation for ESES.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