GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L
GLDW.L (WisdomTree Core Physical Gold) and HOGS.L (WisdomTree Lean Hogs) are both exchange-traded funds - GLDW.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while HOGS.L is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Lean Hogs. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GLDW.L returned 19.87%/yr vs -1.11%/yr for HOGS.L. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. GLDW.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for HOGS.L.
Performance
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
GLDW.L is traded in GBp, while HOGS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the HOGS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLDW.L achieves a 3.96% return, which is significantly higher than HOGS.L's -7.45% return.
GLDW.L
- 1D
- 0.63%
- 1M
- -1.34%
- YTD
- 3.96%
- 6M
- 5.38%
- 1Y
- 33.68%
- 3Y*
- 28.15%
- 5Y*
- 19.87%
- 10Y*
- —
HOGS.L
- 1D
- -1.08%
- 1M
- -2.67%
- YTD
- -7.45%
- 6M
- -4.26%
- 1Y
- -5.66%
- 3Y*
- 6.36%
- 5Y*
- -1.11%
- 10Y*
- -5.52%
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDW.L WisdomTree Core Physical Gold | 3.96% | 53.57% | 28.18% | 7.26% | 11.82% | 9.07% |
HOGS.L WisdomTree Lean Hogs | -7.45% | -1.34% | 24.34% | -26.65% | 22.33% | 9.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDW.L and HOGS.L is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2021 | -0.01 |
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
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L — Risk / Return Rank
GLDW.L
HOGS.L
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Core Physical Gold (GLDW.L) and WisdomTree Lean Hogs (HOGS.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.
| GLDW.L | HOGS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 0.97 | +0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.88 | -0.38 | +2.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.05 | -0.77 | +5.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLDW.L | HOGS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.46 | -0.29 | +1.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.23 | -0.05 | +1.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.20 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.30 | -0.24 | +1.54 |
Drawdowns
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDW.L drawdown since its inception was -17.86%, smaller than the maximum HOGS.L drawdown of -90.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDW.L and HOGS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDW.L | HOGS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.86% | -90.01% | +72.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.86% | -14.96% | -2.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.86% | -22.13% | +4.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.86% | -43.22% | +25.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -70.66% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.93% | -81.57% | +65.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.58% | -67.31% | +63.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.65% | 7.32% | -0.67% |
Volatility
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for WisdomTree Core Physical Gold (GLDW.L) is 5.09%, while WisdomTree Lean Hogs (HOGS.L) has a volatility of 5.45%. This indicates that GLDW.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HOGS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLDW.L | HOGS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.09% | 5.45% | -0.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.81% | 13.36% | +6.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.95% | 19.42% | +3.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.09% | 32.99% | -16.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.94% | 40.06% | -24.12% |
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDW.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than HOGS.L's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLDW.L vs. HOGS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLDW.L nor HOGS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GLDW.L and HOGS.L have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GLDW.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GLDW.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for HOGS.L.
GLDW.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while HOGS.L is Agricultural Commodities. GLDW.L tracks Gold, while HOGS.L tracks Bloomberg Lean Hogs. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GLDW.L and 0.49% for HOGS.L.
Find the right allocation for GLDW.L and HOGS.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