PAF.L vs. GC=F

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

PAF.L (Pan African Resources plc) is a stock, while GC=F (Gold Futures) is an asset. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

PAF.L vs. GC=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Pan African Resources plc (PAF.L) and Gold Futures (GC=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

PAF.L is traded in GBp, while GC=F is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GC=F values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

PAF.L

• 1D: 5.62%
• 1M: -26.94%
• YTD: -9.60%
• 6M: -1.63%
• 1Y: 129.47%
• 3Y*: 108.56%
• 5Y*: 46.75%
• 10Y*: 24.42%

GC=F

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PAF.L vs. GC=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PAF.L Pan African Resources plc	-9.60%	258.03%	109.32%	6.38%	-3.38%
GC=F Gold Futures	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	14.22%

Correlation

The correlation between PAF.L and GC=F is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2022	0.13

Return for Risk

PAF.L vs. GC=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAF.L

PAF.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
PAF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
PAF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PAF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 87
PAF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
PAF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88

GC=F

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

PAF.L vs. GC=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pan African Resources plc (PAF.L) and Gold Futures (GC=F). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	PAF.L	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.69	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.95	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.67	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	PAF.L	GC=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.34%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-70.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.36%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.27%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.65%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PAF.L	GC=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.97%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	44.78%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	54.10%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	48.00%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	53.54%	—	—

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAF.L and GC=F in my portfolio?

PAF.L and GC=F have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.