GBSS.L vs. ESGP.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GBSS.L (Gold Bullion Securities) and ESGP.L (HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF) are both Precious Metals funds - GBSS.L tracks the Gold while ESGP.L tracks the EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GBSS.L returned 27.55%/yr vs 33.25%/yr for ESGP.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GBSS.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for ESGP.L.

Performance

GBSS.L vs. ESGP.L - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBSS.L achieves a 3.09% return, which is significantly higher than ESGP.L's 1.59% return.

GBSS.L

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -2.90%
• YTD: 3.09%
• 6M: 4.31%
• 1Y: 32.90%
• 3Y*: 27.55%
• 5Y*: 19.36%
• 10Y*: 14.02%

ESGP.L

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: 1.59%
• 6M: 5.94%
• 1Y: 64.08%
• 3Y*: 33.25%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GBSS.L Gold Bullion Securities	3.09%	53.13%	27.82%	6.96%	11.51%	2.94%
ESGP.L HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF	1.59%	136.71%	3.17%	-0.39%	2.14%	-3.44%

Correlation

The correlation between GBSS.L and ESGP.L is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2021	0.63

The correlation between GBSS.L and ESGP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (all time) to 0.74 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

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

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

GBSS.L

GBSS.L Risk / Return Rank: 38
GBSS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
GBSS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
GBSS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 45
GBSS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
GBSS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 33

ESGP.L

ESGP.L Risk / Return Rank: 41
ESGP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
ESGP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
ESGP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ESGP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
ESGP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

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

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

	GBSS.L	ESGP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.56	-0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	2.00	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.26	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.83	2.22	-0.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.96	5.62	-0.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current GBSS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the ESGP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBSS.L and ESGP.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GBSS.L	ESGP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	1.56	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.20	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.89	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.60	+0.05

Drawdowns

GBSS.L vs. ESGP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBSS.L drawdown since its inception was -42.08%, which is greater than ESGP.L's maximum drawdown of -36.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBSS.L and ESGP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	GBSS.L	ESGP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.08%	-36.54%	-5.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.92%	-28.67%	+10.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.92%	-28.67%	+10.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.67%	-24.79%	+8.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.55%	-13.49%	-0.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.62%	11.38%	-4.76%

Volatility

GBSS.L vs. ESGP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Gold Bullion Securities (GBSS.L) is 5.06%, while HANetf AuAg ESG Gold Mining UCITS ETF (ESGP.L) has a volatility of 15.32%. This indicates that GBSS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ESGP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GBSS.L	ESGP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.06%	15.32%	-10.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.83%	32.61%	-12.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.97%	40.84%	-17.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.13%	33.20%	-17.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.77%	33.20%	-17.43%

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

GBSS.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than ESGP.L's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

GBSS.L vs. ESGP.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

GBSS.L and ESGP.L have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

On fees, GBSS.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

GBSS.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ESGP.L.

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

GBSS.L tracks Gold, while ESGP.L tracks EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD. They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GBSS.L and 0.60% for ESGP.L.