MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MXFP.L (Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF) and SGLS.L (Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - MXFP.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while SGLS.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold (GBP Hedged). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MXFP.L returned 8.33%/yr vs 17.34%/yr for SGLS.L. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MXFP.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for SGLS.L.

Performance

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (MXFP.L) and Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MXFP.L achieves a 26.12% return, which is significantly higher than SGLS.L's 3.01% return.

MXFP.L

• 1D: -1.62%
• 1M: 6.48%
• YTD: 26.12%
• 6M: 28.40%
• 1Y: 54.01%
• 3Y*: 20.66%
• 5Y*: 8.33%
• 10Y*: 10.75%

SGLS.L

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: -2.49%
• YTD: 3.01%
• 6M: 5.20%
• 1Y: 30.77%
• 3Y*: 29.59%
• 5Y*: 17.34%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
MXFP.L Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF	26.12%	24.86%	8.78%	2.95%	-10.46%	-1.96%	14.00%
SGLS.L Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC	3.01%	64.22%	24.42%	11.48%	-1.42%	-4.63%	-3.17%

Correlation

The correlation between MXFP.L and SGLS.L is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.16
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 29, 2020	0.10

The correlation between MXFP.L and SGLS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MXFP.L

MXFP.L Risk / Return Rank: 89
MXFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
MXFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
MXFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
MXFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
MXFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 86

SGLS.L

SGLS.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
SGLS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
SGLS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
SGLS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 37
SGLS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
SGLS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (MXFP.L) and Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.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.

	MXFP.L	SGLS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.18	1.24	+1.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.08	1.66	+2.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	1.24	+0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.03	1.71	+3.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.75	4.48	+13.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MXFP.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.18, which is higher than the SGLS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MXFP.L and SGLS.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MXFP.L	SGLS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.18	1.24	+1.94
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	1.07	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	0.90	-0.29

Drawdowns

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MXFP.L drawdown since its inception was -27.23%, which is greater than SGLS.L's maximum drawdown of -21.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MXFP.L and SGLS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	MXFP.L	SGLS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.23%	-21.94%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.68%	-17.93%	+7.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.38%	-17.93%	+2.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.92%	-21.94%	-1.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.51%	-15.99%	+13.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.99%	-6.98%	-2.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.03%	6.84%	-3.81%

Volatility

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (MXFP.L) has a higher volatility of 7.48% compared to Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.L) at 6.40%. This indicates that MXFP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SGLS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MXFP.L	SGLS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.48%	6.40%	+1.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.41%	21.65%	-7.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.92%	24.68%	-7.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.21%	17.91%	-1.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.99%	18.29%	-0.30%

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MXFP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than SGLS.L's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

MXFP.L vs. SGLS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MXFP.L nor SGLS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MXFP.L and SGLS.L in my portfolio?

MXFP.L and SGLS.L have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MXFP.L or SGLS.L?

On fees, MXFP.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MXFP.L or SGLS.L?

MXFP.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for SGLS.L.

What is the main difference between MXFP.L and SGLS.L?

MXFP.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while SGLS.L is Precious Metals. MXFP.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while SGLS.L tracks Gold (GBP Hedged). Their fees differ too: 0.19% for MXFP.L and 0.34% for SGLS.L.