PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amundi Physical Gold ETC C (GOLD.AS) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ICOM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GOLD.AS achieves a -7.09% return, which is significantly lower than ICOM.L's 21.45% return.


GOLD.AS

1D
0.00%
1M
-3.39%
6M
-14.19%
YTD
-7.09%
1Y
19.46%
3Y*
26.76%
5Y*
17.17%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
17.09%

ICOM.L

1D
0.31%
1M
3.95%
6M
16.09%
YTD
21.45%
1Y
29.87%
3Y*
12.29%
5Y*
10.46%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
7.69%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
GOLD.AS
Amundi Physical Gold ETC C
-7.09%64.94%26.36%13.35%-0.13%-4.09%24.31%18.40%
ICOM.L
iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF
21.45%16.57%4.40%-7.51%14.83%27.05%-3.74%3.76%

Correlation

The correlation between GOLD.AS and ICOM.L is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.25

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

0.36

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

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2019

0.33

The correlation between GOLD.AS and ICOM.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.25 (1 year) to 0.36 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GOLD.AS
GOLD.AS Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
GOLD.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GOLD.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
GOLD.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
GOLD.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
GOLD.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

ICOM.L
ICOM.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
ICOM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICOM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICOM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
ICOM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICOM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
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.

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Physical Gold ETC C (GOLD.AS) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ICOM.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.


GOLD.ASICOM.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.32

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.79

2.07

-1.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.87

6.57

-4.70

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GOLD.AS Sharpe Ratio is 0.73, which is lower than the ICOM.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GOLD.AS and ICOM.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...

Drawdowns

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GOLD.AS drawdown since its inception was -24.41%, smaller than the maximum ICOM.L drawdown of -33.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GOLD.AS and ICOM.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GOLD.ASICOM.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.41%

-33.13%

+8.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.41%

-14.39%

-10.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.41%

-14.39%

-10.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.41%

-26.74%

+2.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-24.36%

-7.77%

-16.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.57%

-12.40%

+5.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.35%

4.54%

+5.81%

Volatility

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Physical Gold ETC C (GOLD.AS) has a higher volatility of 6.72% compared to iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ICOM.L) at 4.34%. This indicates that GOLD.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICOM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GOLD.ASICOM.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.72%

4.34%

+2.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.20%

15.14%

+8.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.64%

17.17%

+9.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.68%

16.50%

+1.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.28%

14.96%

+2.32%

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GOLD.AS has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than ICOM.L's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

GOLD.AS vs. ICOM.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither GOLD.AS nor ICOM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GOLD.AS and ICOM.L have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GOLD.AS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GOLD.AS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ICOM.L.

GOLD.AS is categorized as Precious Metals, while ICOM.L is Commodities. GOLD.AS tracks LMBA Gold Price PM USD, while ICOM.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity (Total Return Index). They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GOLD.AS and 0.19% for ICOM.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GOLD.AS and ICOM.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