GIGB vs. GDGB.L

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

GIGB (Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and GDGB.L (VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GIGB is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs Investment Grade Corporate Bond Index, while GDGB.L is a Gold fund tracking the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GIGB returned 0.31%/yr vs 17.20%/yr for GDGB.L. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GIGB charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for GDGB.L.

Performance

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GIGB achieves a 0.99% return, which is significantly higher than GDGB.L's -7.35% return.

GIGB

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.70%
• YTD: 0.99%
• 6M: 1.39%
• 1Y: 5.80%
• 3Y*: 5.40%
• 5Y*: 0.31%
• 10Y*: —

GDGB.L

• 1D: 5.31%
• 1M: -17.51%
• YTD: -7.35%
• 6M: -5.86%
• 1Y: 49.71%
• 3Y*: 38.28%
• 5Y*: 17.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GIGB Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF	0.99%	7.58%	1.68%	8.80%	-15.80%	-1.64%	9.86%	15.05%	-2.76%	2.57%
GDGB.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF	-7.35%	156.24%	9.38%	9.16%	-7.97%	-11.28%	23.23%	44.43%	-10.42%	1.81%

Correlation

The correlation between GIGB and GDGB.L is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2017	0.24

Return for Risk

GIGB vs. GDGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GIGB

GIGB Risk / Return Rank: 39
GIGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
GIGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
GIGB Omega Ratio Rank: 37
GIGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
GIGB Martin Ratio Rank: 40

GDGB.L

GDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 35
GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
GDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
GDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 36
GDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
GDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) 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.

	GIGB	GDGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	1.11	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.81	1.60	+0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.20	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	1.41	+0.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.74	3.89	+1.85

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIGB Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is comparable to the GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIGB 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

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIGB drawdown since its inception was -22.25%, smaller than the maximum GDGB.L drawdown of -50.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIGB and GDGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	GIGB	GDGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.25%	-50.68%	+28.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.87%	-35.18%	+32.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.69%	-35.18%	+28.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.25%	-46.27%	+24.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.64%	-31.02%	+30.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.60%	-17.81%	+12.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.92%	12.73%	-11.81%

Volatility

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) is 1.43%, while VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L) has a volatility of 14.95%. This indicates that GIGB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GIGB	GDGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.43%	14.95%	-13.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.23%	36.15%	-32.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.31%	44.61%	-40.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.25%	35.73%	-28.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.66%	34.29%	-26.63%

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GIGB has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than GDGB.L's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

GIGB vs. GDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

GIGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%, while GDGB.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GDGB.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GIGB Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF	4.60%	4.69%	4.45%	3.67%	3.12%	2.25%	2.62%	3.22%	3.31%	1.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

GIGB and GDGB.L have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GIGB or GDGB.L?

On fees, GIGB is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GIGB or GDGB.L?

GIGB is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for GDGB.L.

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

GIGB is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while GDGB.L is Gold. GIGB tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Investment Grade Corporate Bond Index, while GDGB.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for GIGB and 0.53% for GDGB.L.