PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Europe Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIC.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESIC.L achieves a -11.67% return, which is significantly lower than SGLN.L's 3.89% return.


ESIC.L

1D
0.48%
1M
7.15%
YTD
-11.67%
6M
-11.51%
1Y
-3.34%
3Y*
-2.82%
5Y*
-1.55%
10Y*

SGLN.L

1D
0.70%
1M
-1.36%
YTD
3.89%
6M
5.42%
1Y
33.75%
3Y*
28.17%
5Y*
20.12%
10Y*
14.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ESIC.L
iShares MSCI Europe Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
-11.67%7.11%-1.15%12.93%-11.01%14.25%5.78%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
3.89%53.66%28.20%7.24%11.84%-2.57%0.41%

Correlation

The correlation between ESIC.L and SGLN.L is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.15

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

0.02

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

-0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2020

-0.01

The correlation between ESIC.L and SGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (5 years) to 0.15 (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

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESIC.L
ESIC.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
ESIC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESIC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESIC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
ESIC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESIC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank

SGLN.L
SGLN.L Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Europe Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIC.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.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.


ESIC.LSGLN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.99

1.29

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.15

1.91

-2.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.35

5.05

-5.40

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESIC.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.17, which is lower than the SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESIC.L and SGLN.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ESIC.LSGLN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.17

1.45

-1.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.07

1.23

-1.31

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.90

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

0.55

-0.43

Drawdowns

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESIC.L drawdown since its inception was -28.93%, smaller than the maximum SGLN.L drawdown of -41.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESIC.L and SGLN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESIC.LSGLN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.93%

-41.71%

+12.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.82%

-17.57%

-4.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.39%

-17.57%

-5.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.93%

-17.57%

-11.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-21.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.64%

-16.01%

+0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.39%

-14.76%

+5.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.50%

6.67%

+2.83%

Volatility

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Europe Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIC.L) has a higher volatility of 6.36% compared to iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) at 5.08%. This indicates that ESIC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESIC.LSGLN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.36%

5.08%

+1.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.17%

20.08%

-4.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.03%

23.19%

-4.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.84%

16.30%

+4.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.37%

15.78%

+4.59%

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESIC.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.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

ESIC.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESIC.L nor SGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ESIC.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SGLN.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for ESIC.L.

ESIC.L is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while SGLN.L is Gold. ESIC.L tracks Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESIC.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESIC.L and SGLN.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