PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GFA.L vs. REGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Global Fallen Angel High Yield Bond UCITS ETF (GFA.L) and VanEck Rare Earth and Strategic Metals UCITS ETF A (REGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

GFA.L is traded in USD, while REGB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the REGB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GFA.L achieves a 2.23% return, which is significantly lower than REGB.L's 6.60% return.


GFA.L

1D
-1.58%
1M
-1.67%
6M
2.02%
YTD
2.23%
1Y
5.68%
3Y*
7.70%
5Y*
2.71%
10Y*

REGB.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-19.13%
6M
-13.13%
YTD
6.60%
1Y
68.06%
3Y*
-2.45%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GFA.L
VanEck Global Fallen Angel High Yield Bond UCITS ETF
2.23%9.97%6.02%10.29%-12.56%-1.65%
REGB.L
VanEck Rare Earth and Strategic Metals UCITS ETF A
6.60%88.93%-35.64%-18.71%-31.13%-21.10%

Correlation

The correlation between GFA.L and REGB.L is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.28

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

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2021

0.36

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

GFA.L vs. REGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GFA.L
GFA.L Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
GFA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GFA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
GFA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
GFA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
GFA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

REGB.L
REGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
REGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
REGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
REGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
REGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
REGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
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.

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Global Fallen Angel High Yield Bond UCITS ETF (GFA.L) and VanEck Rare Earth and Strategic Metals UCITS ETF A (REGB.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.


GFA.LREGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.24

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.42

2.30

-0.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.83

6.36

-2.53

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFA.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the REGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFA.L and REGB.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...

Drawdowns

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFA.L drawdown since its inception was -22.98%, smaller than the maximum REGB.L drawdown of -75.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFA.L and REGB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GFA.LREGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.98%

-75.84%

+52.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.90%

-29.76%

+25.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.14%

-60.66%

+55.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.07%

-42.74%

+40.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.38%

-48.30%

+43.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.45%

10.73%

-9.28%

Volatility

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Global Fallen Angel High Yield Bond UCITS ETF (GFA.L) is 2.17%, while VanEck Rare Earth and Strategic Metals UCITS ETF A (REGB.L) has a volatility of 11.11%. This indicates that GFA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than REGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GFA.LREGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.17%

11.11%

-8.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.88%

34.18%

-28.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.68%

46.90%

-40.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.29%

48.26%

-39.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.44%

48.26%

-39.82%

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFA.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than REGB.L's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

GFA.L vs. REGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither GFA.L nor REGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GFA.L and REGB.L have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

GFA.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for REGB.L.

GFA.L is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while REGB.L is Rare Earth & Strategic Metals. GFA.L tracks VanEck Global Fallen Angel High Yield Bond UCITS ETF, while REGB.L tracks EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GFA.L and 0.59% for REGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GFA.L and REGB.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