NATP.L vs. RMAP.L
Compare and contrast key facts about HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP (NATP.L) and HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L).
NATP.L and RMAP.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. NATP.L is a passively managed fund by HANetf that tracks the performance of the EQM Future of Defence Index. It was launched on Jun 30, 2023. RMAP.L is a passively managed fund by HANetf that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Feb 12, 2020. Both NATP.L and RMAP.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
NATP.L HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP | 4.07% | 43.73% | 34.66% | 15.89% |
RMAP.L HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC | 9.42% | 53.50% | 28.00% | 6.96% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NATP.L achieves a 4.07% return, which is significantly lower than RMAP.L's 9.42% return.
NATP.L
- 1D
- 1.06%
- 1M
- -2.66%
- YTD
- 4.07%
- 6M
- -1.74%
- 1Y
- 30.24%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RMAP.L
- 1D
- 2.06%
- 1M
- -9.72%
- YTD
- 9.42%
- 6M
- 22.78%
- 1Y
- 44.95%
- 3Y*
- 29.59%
- 5Y*
- 22.75%
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
NATP.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAP.L's 0.22% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L — Risk / Return Rank
NATP.L
RMAP.L
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP (NATP.L) and HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.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.
| NATP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.44 | 0.93 | +0.51 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.07 | 1.52 | +0.55 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.36 | -0.10 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.42 | 1.63 | +0.79 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.20 | 3.68 | +2.52 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NATP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.44 | 0.93 | +0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.93 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.01 | 0.76 | +1.25 |
Correlation
The correlation between NATP.L and RMAP.L is 0.11, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither NATP.L nor RMAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NATP.L drawdown since its inception was -11.66%, smaller than the maximum RMAP.L drawdown of -27.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NATP.L and RMAP.L.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| NATP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.66% | -27.31% | +15.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.55% | -27.31% | +15.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.31% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.46% | -14.64% | +6.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.15% | -7.03% | +4.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.52% | 12.11% | -7.59% |
Volatility
NATP.L vs. RMAP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP (NATP.L) is 5.82%, while HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) has a volatility of 11.49%. This indicates that NATP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RMAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| NATP.L | RMAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.82% | 11.49% | -5.67% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.62% | 47.02% | -32.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.97% | 48.07% | -27.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.09% | 24.72% | -6.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.09% | 23.89% | -5.80% |