PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (MOGB.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOGB.L achieves a -2.45% return, which is significantly lower than GDGB.L's 0.91% return.


MOGB.L

1D
1.16%
1M
3.10%
YTD
-2.45%
6M
-3.89%
1Y
9.50%
3Y*
5.38%
5Y*
4.31%
10Y*

GDGB.L

1D
0.68%
1M
-4.88%
YTD
0.91%
6M
6.31%
1Y
65.52%
3Y*
37.68%
5Y*
20.20%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MOGB.L
VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF
-2.45%0.00%12.94%11.88%-9.07%27.24%9.78%29.63%3.53%4.34%
GDGB.L
VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF
0.91%138.26%11.24%3.69%3.04%-10.47%19.56%38.86%-5.04%-4.03%

Correlation

The correlation between MOGB.L and GDGB.L is 0.09, 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

0.09

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

0.09

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

0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2017

0.07

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

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MOGB.L
MOGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
MOGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MOGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
MOGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
MOGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
MOGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

GDGB.L
GDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
GDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
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.

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (MOGB.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.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.


MOGB.LGDGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.79

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.26

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.86

2.23

-1.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.08

5.70

-3.62

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOGB.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOGB.L and GDGB.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


MOGB.LGDGB.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

1.55

-0.79

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

0.62

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.51

+0.06

Drawdowns

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOGB.L drawdown since its inception was -24.07%, smaller than the maximum GDGB.L drawdown of -40.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOGB.L and GDGB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MOGB.LGDGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.07%

-40.80%

+16.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.01%

-28.97%

+17.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.73%

-28.97%

+6.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.73%

-35.49%

+12.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.72%

-24.72%

+18.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.79%

-17.52%

+12.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.54%

11.36%

-6.82%

Volatility

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (MOGB.L) is 3.24%, while VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L) has a volatility of 14.28%. This indicates that MOGB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MOGB.LGDGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.24%

14.28%

-11.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.51%

33.43%

-24.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.44%

41.77%

-29.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.51%

32.58%

-18.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.20%

32.11%

-15.91%

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOGB.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GDGB.L's 0.53% expense ratio.


Dividends

MOGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MOGB.L nor GDGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MOGB.L and GDGB.L have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MOGB.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MOGB.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for GDGB.L.

MOGB.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GDGB.L is Gold. MOGB.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while GDGB.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MOGB.L and 0.53% for GDGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MOGB.L and GDGB.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