PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Market Access NYSE Arca Gold Bugs UCITS ETF (GOLB.L) and Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GOLB.L achieves a 5.89% return, which is significantly higher than M9SV.L's -1.93% return.


GOLB.L

1D
1.00%
1M
-4.70%
YTD
5.89%
6M
9.71%
1Y
72.65%
3Y*
40.72%
5Y*
20.34%
10Y*
16.54%

M9SV.L

1D
-0.83%
1M
-2.64%
YTD
-1.93%
6M
-1.85%
1Y
7.26%
3Y*
6.60%
5Y*
4.90%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
GOLB.L
Market Access NYSE Arca Gold Bugs UCITS ETF
5.89%138.45%14.05%0.34%1.34%-14.65%84.95%0.00%0.00%
M9SV.L
Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF
-1.93%0.90%30.31%0.87%-6.40%7.53%22.73%5.67%-5.57%

Correlation

The correlation between GOLB.L and M9SV.L is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.17

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

0.06

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 7, 2018

0.08

The correlation between GOLB.L and M9SV.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (3 years) to 0.17 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GOLB.L
M9SV.L

Industrials

28.2%
18.4%

Healthcare

20.3%
4.8%

Financial Services

16.2%
24.5%

Real Estate

13.8%
0.5%

Technology

9.1%
4.9%

Communication Services

5.9%
4.5%

Basic Materials

3.7%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

-

11.9%

Energy

-

7.4%

Utilities

-

13.9%

Industrials

GOLB.L
28.2%
M9SV.L
18.4%

Healthcare

GOLB.L
20.3%
M9SV.L
4.8%

Financial Services

GOLB.L
16.2%
M9SV.L
24.5%

Real Estate

GOLB.L
13.8%
M9SV.L
0.5%

Technology

GOLB.L
9.1%
M9SV.L
4.9%

Communication Services

GOLB.L
5.9%
M9SV.L
4.5%

Basic Materials

GOLB.L
3.7%
M9SV.L
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

GOLB.L
2.9%
M9SV.L
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

GOLB.L

-

M9SV.L
11.9%

Energy

GOLB.L

-

M9SV.L
7.4%

Utilities

GOLB.L

-

M9SV.L
13.9%

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

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GOLB.L
GOLB.L Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
GOLB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GOLB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
GOLB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
GOLB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
GOLB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

M9SV.L
M9SV.L Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
M9SV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
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.

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Market Access NYSE Arca Gold Bugs UCITS ETF (GOLB.L) and Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.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.


GOLB.LM9SV.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.11

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.64

0.87

+1.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.72

2.39

+4.33

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GOLB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is higher than the M9SV.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GOLB.L and M9SV.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GOLB.LM9SV.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.78

0.62

+1.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

0.25

+0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.15

0.30

-0.16

Drawdowns

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GOLB.L drawdown since its inception was -84.29%, which is greater than M9SV.L's maximum drawdown of -21.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GOLB.L and M9SV.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GOLB.LM9SV.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-84.29%

-21.64%

-62.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.11%

-8.71%

-19.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.11%

-21.64%

-6.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.60%

-21.64%

-15.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.56%

-11.94%

-11.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-49.39%

-7.84%

-41.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.08%

3.19%

+7.89%

Volatility

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Volatility Comparison

Market Access NYSE Arca Gold Bugs UCITS ETF (GOLB.L) has a higher volatility of 14.80% compared to Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) at 2.56%. This indicates that GOLB.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than M9SV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GOLB.LM9SV.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.80%

2.56%

+12.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

33.10%

7.77%

+25.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

41.89%

12.18%

+29.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

33.81%

19.98%

+13.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.39%

20.48%

+13.91%

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GOLB.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than M9SV.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither GOLB.L nor M9SV.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GOLB.L and M9SV.L have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, M9SV.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

M9SV.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for GOLB.L.

GOLB.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while M9SV.L is China Equities. GOLB.L tracks EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD, while M9SV.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for GOLB.L and 0.45% for M9SV.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GOLB.L and M9SV.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