GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L
GOLB.L (Market Access NYSE Arca Gold Bugs UCITS ETF) and M9SV.L (Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GOLB.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD, while M9SV.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GOLB.L returned 20.34%/yr vs 4.90%/yr for M9SV.L. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GOLB.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for M9SV.L.
Performance
GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
GOLB.L vs. M9SV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Healthcare
Financial Services
Real Estate
Technology
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Healthcare
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Financial Services
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Real Estate
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Technology
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Communication Services
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Basic Materials
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Consumer Defensive
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
Consumer Cyclical
GOLB.L
-
M9SV.L
Energy
GOLB.L
-
M9SV.L
Utilities
GOLB.L
-
M9SV.L
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
GOLB.L
M9SV.L
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.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| GOLB.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.56% | -11.94% | -11.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -49.39% | -7.84% | -41.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
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.
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