GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE
GLDA.DE (Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C)) and ESGP.DE (Gold Miners Screened UCITS ETF) are both Gold funds - GLDA.DE tracks the Gold while ESGP.DE tracks the VettaFi Gold Miners Screened Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GLDA.DE returned 26.61%/yr vs 11.24%/yr for ESGP.DE. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLDA.DE charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for ESGP.DE.
Performance
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLDA.DE achieves a -5.48% return, which is significantly lower than ESGP.DE's 11.48% return.
GLDA.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -5.04%
- 6M
- -10.91%
- YTD
- -5.48%
- 1Y
- 22.75%
- 3Y*
- 26.61%
- 5Y*
- 18.07%
- 10Y*
- —
ESGP.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 3.54%
- 6M
- 8.31%
- YTD
- 11.48%
- 1Y
- 16.66%
- 3Y*
- 11.24%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDA.DE Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C) | -5.48% | 48.99% | 34.24% | 9.40% | 7.00% | 4.23% |
ESGP.DE Gold Miners Screened UCITS ETF | 11.48% | 5.79% | 12.94% | 2.10% | -2.36% | 2.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDA.DE and ESGP.DE is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021 | 0.20 |
Over the past year, GLDA.DE and ESGP.DE have become more correlated (0.40) than their long-term average of 0.20, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE — Risk / Return Rank
GLDA.DE
ESGP.DE
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C) (GLDA.DE) and Gold Miners Screened UCITS ETF (ESGP.DE). 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.
| GLDA.DE | ESGP.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.25 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.03 | 2.65 | -1.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.41 | 7.50 | -5.09 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDA.DE drawdown since its inception was -22.23%, which is greater than ESGP.DE's maximum drawdown of -20.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDA.DE and ESGP.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDA.DE | ESGP.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.23% | -20.50% | -1.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.23% | -6.31% | -15.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.23% | -20.50% | -1.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.23% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -21.80% | 0.00% | -21.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.02% | -5.23% | -0.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.45% | 2.23% | +7.22% |
Volatility
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Volatility Comparison
Amundi Physical Gold ETC (C) (GLDA.DE) has a higher volatility of 6.44% compared to Gold Miners Screened UCITS ETF (ESGP.DE) at 2.13%. This indicates that GLDA.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ESGP.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLDA.DE | ESGP.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.44% | 2.13% | +4.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.12% | 8.96% | +12.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.52% | 11.59% | +12.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.45% | 14.44% | +2.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.12% | 14.44% | +1.68% |
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDA.DE has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than ESGP.DE's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLDA.DE vs. ESGP.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLDA.DE nor ESGP.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GLDA.DE and ESGP.DE have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GLDA.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GLDA.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ESGP.DE.
GLDA.DE tracks Gold, while ESGP.DE tracks VettaFi Gold Miners Screened Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GLDA.DE and 0.60% for ESGP.DE.
Find the right allocation for GLDA.DE and ESGP.DE
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