IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L
IGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) and RMAU.L (The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities) are both exchange-traded funds - IGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price, while RMAU.L is a Commodities fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IGLN.L returned 18.61%/yr vs 18.44%/yr for RMAU.L. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IGLN.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for RMAU.L.
Performance
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
As of year-to-date, both investments have demonstrated similar returns, with IGLN.L at 3.70% and RMAU.L at 3.70%.
IGLN.L
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- -2.35%
- YTD
- 3.70%
- 6M
- 6.03%
- 1Y
- 32.37%
- 3Y*
- 31.55%
- 5Y*
- 18.61%
- 10Y*
- 13.42%
RMAU.L
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -2.38%
- YTD
- 3.70%
- 6M
- 6.00%
- 1Y
- 32.20%
- 3Y*
- 31.36%
- 5Y*
- 18.44%
- 10Y*
- —
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 3.70% | 64.92% | 26.14% | 13.44% | -0.09% | -4.03% | 15.20% |
RMAU.L The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities | 3.70% | 64.57% | 25.96% | 13.29% | -0.19% | -4.14% | 14.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between IGLN.L and RMAU.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2020 | 0.89 |
The correlation between IGLN.L and RMAU.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.99 - 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
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank
IGLN.L
RMAU.L
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.L) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.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.
| IGLN.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.25 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.86 | 1.77 | +0.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.79 | 4.69 | +0.10 |
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
| IGLN.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.30 | 1.29 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.07 | 1.06 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.86 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 0.81 | -0.36 |
Drawdowns
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IGLN.L drawdown since its inception was -45.24%, which is greater than RMAU.L's maximum drawdown of -21.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGLN.L and RMAU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IGLN.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.24% | -21.56% | -23.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.36% | -18.15% | +0.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.36% | -18.15% | +0.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.15% | -21.17% | +0.02% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -21.15% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.66% | -15.95% | +0.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.80% | -7.09% | -12.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.74% | 6.84% | -0.10% |
Volatility
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.L) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) have volatilities of 6.36% and 6.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IGLN.L | RMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.36% | 6.42% | -0.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.73% | 21.86% | -0.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.78% | 24.82% | -0.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.36% | 17.62% | -0.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.54% | 21.34% | -5.80% |
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IGLN.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAU.L's 0.22% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IGLN.L vs. RMAU.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither IGLN.L nor RMAU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, IGLN.L and RMAU.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, RMAU.L is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RMAU.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for IGLN.L.
IGLN.L is categorized as Gold, while RMAU.L is Commodities. IGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price, while RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for IGLN.L and 0.22% for RMAU.L.
Find the right allocation for IGLN.L and RMAU.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