PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IMIB.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMIB.L achieves a 11.33% return, which is significantly higher than SGLN.L's 3.89% return. Over the past 10 years, IMIB.L has underperformed SGLN.L with an annualized return of 12.13%, while SGLN.L has yielded a comparatively higher 14.27% annualized return.


IMIB.L

1D
0.02%
1M
2.98%
YTD
11.33%
6M
14.60%
1Y
28.71%
3Y*
23.85%
5Y*
15.08%
10Y*
12.13%

SGLN.L

1D
0.70%
1M
-1.36%
YTD
3.89%
6M
5.42%
1Y
33.75%
3Y*
28.17%
5Y*
20.12%
10Y*
14.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMIB.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist)
11.33%38.08%8.33%25.41%-7.28%14.64%-0.17%20.68%-15.30%18.23%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
3.89%53.66%28.20%7.24%11.84%-2.57%19.62%14.63%4.36%1.68%

Correlation

The correlation between IMIB.L and SGLN.L is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.15

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

0.04

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

-0.01

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

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011

0.00

The correlation between IMIB.L and SGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (5 years) to 0.15 (1 year), 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

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMIB.L
IMIB.L Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
IMIB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

SGLN.L
SGLN.L Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IMIB.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.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.


IMIB.LSGLN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.29

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

1.91

+0.87

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.17

5.05

+4.12

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMIB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMIB.L and SGLN.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IMIB.LSGLN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.87

1.45

+0.42

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

1.23

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.90

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

0.55

-0.44

Drawdowns

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMIB.L drawdown since its inception was -65.01%, which is greater than SGLN.L's maximum drawdown of -41.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMIB.L and SGLN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMIB.LSGLN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-65.01%

-41.71%

-23.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.28%

-17.57%

+7.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.58%

-17.57%

+1.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.95%

-17.57%

-9.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.60%

-21.91%

-15.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.64%

-16.01%

+15.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-31.09%

-14.76%

-16.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.12%

6.67%

-3.55%

Volatility

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IMIB.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) have volatilities of 4.94% and 5.08%, 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


IMIB.LSGLN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.94%

5.08%

-0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.23%

20.08%

-7.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.32%

23.19%

-7.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.12%

16.30%

+1.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.71%

15.78%

+3.93%

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMIB.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.L's 0.12% expense ratio.


Dividends

IMIB.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison

IMIB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, while SGLN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMIB.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist)
0.04%0.04%0.05%0.04%0.04%0.03%0.01%0.03%0.03%0.02%0.03%0.02%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMIB.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

SGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for IMIB.L.

IMIB.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while SGLN.L is Gold. IMIB.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for IMIB.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IMIB.L and SGLN.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