INRG.L vs. SGLN.L
INRG.L (iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and SGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - INRG.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD, while SGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, INRG.L returned 12.64%/yr vs 14.27%/yr for SGLN.L. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INRG.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLN.L.
Performance
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INRG.L achieves a 39.09% return, which is significantly higher than SGLN.L's 3.89% return. Over the past 10 years, INRG.L has underperformed SGLN.L with an annualized return of 12.64%, while SGLN.L has yielded a comparatively higher 14.27% annualized return.
INRG.L
- 1D
- -2.01%
- 1M
- 8.39%
- YTD
- 39.09%
- 6M
- 35.51%
- 1Y
- 82.63%
- 3Y*
- 5.64%
- 5Y*
- 2.72%
- 10Y*
- 12.64%
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%
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 39.09% | 34.75% | -24.39% | -23.83% | 5.52% | -23.71% | 135.23% | 39.22% | -2.66% | 10.46% |
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 INRG.L and SGLN.L is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011 | 0.08 |
The correlation between INRG.L and SGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (all time) to 0.20 (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
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
INRG.L
SGLN.L
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.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.
| INRG.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.29 | +0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.64 | 1.91 | +4.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.87 | 5.05 | +14.82 |
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
| INRG.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.42 | 1.45 | +1.97 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | 1.23 | -1.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.50 | 0.90 | -0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.02 | 0.55 | -0.53 |
Drawdowns
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INRG.L drawdown since its inception was -85.09%, 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 INRG.L and SGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INRG.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -85.09% | -41.71% | -43.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.38% | -17.57% | +5.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -44.29% | -17.57% | -26.72% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -57.38% | -17.57% | -39.81% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -65.47% | -21.91% | -43.56% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.35% | -16.01% | -11.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.54% | -14.76% | -41.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.15% | 6.67% | -2.52% |
Volatility
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) has a higher volatility of 9.58% compared to iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) at 5.08%. This indicates that INRG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INRG.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.58% | 5.08% | +4.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.61% | 20.08% | -2.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.04% | 23.19% | +0.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.80% | 16.30% | +8.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.33% | 15.78% | +9.55% |
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
INRG.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.L's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
INRG.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
INRG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, while SGLN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.09% | 1.77% | 1.58% | 1.00% | 0.62% | 1.01% | 0.61% | 2.05% | 3.68% | 3.69% | 3.65% | 3.90% |
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
INRG.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of 0.20, 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 0.65% for INRG.L.
INRG.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while SGLN.L is Gold. INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for INRG.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for INRG.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