ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

ESGS.L (Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF) and SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) are both exchange-traded funds - ESGS.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF, while SGLP.L is a Gold fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ESGS.L returned 12.45%/yr vs 17.81%/yr for SGLP.L. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESGS.L charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLP.L.

Performance

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF (ESGS.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESGS.L achieves a 10.62% return, which is significantly higher than SGLP.L's -6.33% return.

ESGS.L

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: -1.16%
• 6M: 9.99%
• YTD: 10.62%
• 1Y: 20.69%
• 3Y*: 18.46%
• 5Y*: 12.45%
• 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%

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

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ESGS.L Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF	10.62%	7.44%	26.67%	21.17%	-12.52%	30.30%	19.47%	-14.12%
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A	-6.33%	53.60%	28.14%	7.26%	11.83%	-2.88%	19.99%	9.88%

Correlation

The correlation between ESGS.L and SGLP.L is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.07
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2019	0.04

The correlation between ESGS.L and SGLP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.02 (5 years) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESGS.L

ESGS.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
ESGS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
ESGS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
ESGS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 74
ESGS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ESGS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 65

SGLP.L

SGLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 26
SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
SGLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
SGLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 30
SGLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
SGLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF (ESGS.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.

	ESGS.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	0.84	+1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.64	1.21	+1.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.17	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.71	0.84	+1.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.33	2.08	+7.24

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESGS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is higher than the SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESGS.L and SGLP.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

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESGS.L drawdown since its inception was -29.04%, smaller than the maximum SGLP.L drawdown of -63.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESGS.L and SGLP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESGS.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.04%	-63.75%	+34.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.16%	-24.29%	+16.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.65%	-24.29%	+2.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.65%	-24.29%	+2.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.34%	-24.29%	+21.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.91%	-31.67%	+24.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.38%	9.84%	-7.46%

Volatility

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF (ESGS.L) is 3.72%, while Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) has a volatility of 6.71%. This indicates that ESGS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESGS.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.72%	6.71%	-2.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.56%	21.07%	-12.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.63%	24.32%	-12.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.36%	21.89%	-1.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.42%	18.29%	+3.13%

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESGS.L has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than SGLP.L's 0.12% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ESGS.L vs. SGLP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESGS.L nor SGLP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESGS.L and SGLP.L in my portfolio?

ESGS.L and SGLP.L have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESGS.L or SGLP.L?

On fees, ESGS.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESGS.L or SGLP.L?

ESGS.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.12% for SGLP.L.

What is the main difference between ESGS.L and SGLP.L?

ESGS.L is categorized as Global Equities, while SGLP.L is Gold. ESGS.L tracks Invesco MSCI USA Universal Screened UCITS ETF, while SGLP.L tracks Gold. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for ESGS.L and 0.12% for SGLP.L.