ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

ESGP.L (HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF) and GDGB.L (VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF) are both Gold funds - ESGP.L tracks the EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD while GDGB.L tracks the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ESGP.L returned 32.96%/yr vs 36.08%/yr for GDGB.L. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ESGP.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for GDGB.L.

Performance

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESGP.L achieves a -8.52% return, which is significantly higher than GDGB.L's -9.63% return.

ESGP.L

• 1D: 1.31%
• 1M: -11.60%
• YTD: -8.52%
• 6M: -12.74%
• 1Y: 47.38%
• 3Y*: 32.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GDGB.L

• 1D: 1.30%
• 1M: -11.13%
• YTD: -9.63%
• 6M: -13.73%
• 1Y: 52.81%
• 3Y*: 36.08%
• 5Y*: 19.88%
• 10Y*: —

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

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ESGP.L HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF	-8.52%	136.71%	3.17%	-0.39%	2.14%	-2.42%
GDGB.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF	-9.63%	138.26%	11.24%	3.69%	3.04%	-3.50%

Correlation

The correlation between ESGP.L and GDGB.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2021	0.94

The correlation between ESGP.L and GDGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ESGP.L	GDGB.L
Basic Materials	100.0%	100.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESGP.L

ESGP.L Risk / Return Rank: 31
ESGP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
ESGP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
ESGP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 32
ESGP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
ESGP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 27

GDGB.L

GDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
GDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
GDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 34
GDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
GDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.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.

	ESGP.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.19	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	1.67	-0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.21	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.40	1.52	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.50	3.92	-0.42

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESGP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is comparable to the GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESGP.L and GDGB.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.

Drawdowns

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESGP.L drawdown since its inception was -36.54%, smaller than the maximum GDGB.L drawdown of -40.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESGP.L and GDGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESGP.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.54%	-40.80%	+4.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-33.80%	-34.64%	+0.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.80%	-34.64%	+0.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.49%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.27%	-32.59%	+0.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.71%	-17.58%	+3.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.50%	13.44%	+0.06%

Volatility

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L) have volatilities of 17.26% and 16.75%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESGP.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.26%	16.75%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.21%	36.16%	-0.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.22%	44.22%	-1.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.72%	33.25%	+0.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.72%	32.39%	+1.33%

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESGP.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than GDGB.L's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESGP.L vs. GDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESGP.L nor GDGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESGP.L and GDGB.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, ESGP.L and GDGB.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, ESGP.L or GDGB.L?

On fees, GDGB.L is cheaper at 0.53% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESGP.L or GDGB.L?

GDGB.L is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ESGP.L.

What is the main difference between ESGP.L and GDGB.L?

ESGP.L tracks EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD, while GDGB.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for ESGP.L and 0.53% for GDGB.L.