PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IAU vs. XDW0.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Gold Trust (IAU) and Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C (XDW0.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IAU achieves a -2.44% return, which is significantly lower than XDW0.L's 28.94% return. Over the past 10 years, IAU has outperformed XDW0.L with an annualized return of 12.31%, while XDW0.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.55% annualized return.


IAU

1D
0.08%
1M
-9.54%
YTD
-2.44%
6M
-2.22%
1Y
22.32%
3Y*
29.07%
5Y*
17.23%
10Y*
12.31%

XDW0.L

1D
-0.77%
1M
-0.41%
YTD
28.94%
6M
29.39%
1Y
36.83%
3Y*
17.23%
5Y*
18.57%
10Y*
9.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IAU
iShares Gold Trust
-2.44%63.95%26.85%12.84%-0.63%-4.00%25.03%17.98%-1.76%12.91%
XDW0.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C
28.94%14.66%2.11%3.68%46.28%39.22%-30.39%10.05%-15.00%4.49%

Correlation

The correlation between IAU and XDW0.L is 0.05, 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

0.05

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

0.12

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

0.13

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2010

0.10

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

IAU vs. XDW0.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IAU
IAU Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
IAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
IAU Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
IAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
IAU Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

XDW0.L
XDW0.L Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
XDW0.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Trust (IAU) and Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C (XDW0.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.


IAUXDW0.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.35

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.99

3.19

-2.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.83

10.19

-7.35

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the XDW0.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IAU and XDW0.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

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IAU drawdown since its inception was -45.14%, smaller than the maximum XDW0.L drawdown of -68.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAU and XDW0.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IAUXDW0.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.14%

-68.41%

+23.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.40%

-12.15%

-12.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.40%

-18.89%

-5.51%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.40%

-26.47%

+2.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.40%

-63.72%

+39.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.03%

-7.45%

-14.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.97%

-18.56%

+2.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.47%

3.81%

+4.66%

Volatility

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Trust (IAU) has a higher volatility of 7.70% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C (XDW0.L) at 6.01%. This indicates that IAU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDW0.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IAUXDW0.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.70%

6.01%

+1.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.94%

16.44%

+7.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.17%

19.30%

+7.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.16%

24.22%

-6.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.02%

26.14%

-10.12%

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IAU and XDW0.L have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IAU vs. XDW0.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IAU nor XDW0.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


IAU and XDW0.L have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IAU and XDW0.L have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

IAU is categorized as Gold, while XDW0.L is Energy Equities. IAU tracks LBMA Gold Price, while XDW0.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IAU and XDW0.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