IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L
IAUP.L (iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF USD Acc) and RMAP.L (HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - IAUP.L is a Gold fund tracking the S&P Commodity Producers Gold Index, while RMAP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IAUP.L returned 18.73%/yr vs 18.68%/yr for RMAP.L. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IAUP.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for RMAP.L.
Performance
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
IAUP.L is traded in USD, while RMAP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the RMAP.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IAUP.L achieves a 1.67% return, which is significantly lower than RMAP.L's 3.60% return.
IAUP.L
- 1D
- 0.89%
- 1M
- -0.28%
- YTD
- 1.67%
- 6M
- 7.47%
- 1Y
- 63.58%
- 3Y*
- 42.10%
- 5Y*
- 18.73%
- 10Y*
- 14.14%
RMAP.L
- 1D
- 0.81%
- 1M
- -2.17%
- YTD
- 3.60%
- 6M
- 6.20%
- 1Y
- 32.29%
- 3Y*
- 31.29%
- 5Y*
- 18.68%
- 10Y*
- —
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IAUP.L iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF USD Acc | 1.67% | 153.95% | 11.53% | 9.39% | -11.06% | -10.31% | 23.19% |
RMAP.L HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC | 3.60% | 65.08% | 25.86% | 12.74% | -0.20% | -3.69% | 16.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between IAUP.L and RMAP.L is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2020 | 0.68 |
The correlation between IAUP.L and RMAP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L — Risk / Return Rank
IAUP.L
RMAP.L
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF USD Acc (IAUP.L) and HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.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.
| IAUP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.79 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.27 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.21 | 1.17 | +1.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.66 | 2.39 | +3.27 |
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
| IAUP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.46 | 0.67 | +0.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 | 0.74 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.41 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.09 | 0.71 | -0.62 |
Drawdowns
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IAUP.L drawdown since its inception was -79.95%, which is greater than RMAP.L's maximum drawdown of -27.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAUP.L and RMAP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IAUP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.95% | -27.53% | -52.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -28.57% | -27.53% | -1.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.57% | -27.53% | -1.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.90% | -27.53% | -17.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.26% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.01% | -18.30% | -5.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -49.54% | -7.93% | -41.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.20% | 13.46% | -2.26% |
Volatility
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF USD Acc (IAUP.L) has a higher volatility of 14.96% compared to HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) at 5.72%. This indicates that IAUP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RMAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IAUP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.96% | 5.72% | +9.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 35.03% | 20.92% | +14.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.36% | 47.97% | -4.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.32% | 25.63% | +9.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.55% | 24.68% | +9.87% |
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IAUP.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAP.L's 0.22% expense ratio.
Dividends
IAUP.L vs. RMAP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither IAUP.L nor RMAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IAUP.L and RMAP.L have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RMAP.L is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RMAP.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for IAUP.L.
IAUP.L is categorized as Gold, while RMAP.L is Precious Metals. IAUP.L tracks S&P Commodity Producers Gold Index, while RMAP.L tracks Gold. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for IAUP.L and 0.22% for RMAP.L.
Find the right allocation for IAUP.L and RMAP.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