PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

PAWS.L (Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc) and SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWS.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while SGLP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PAWS.L returned 12.44%/yr vs 26.66%/yr for SGLP.L. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PAWS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLP.L.

Performance

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc (PAWS.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAWS.L achieves a 5.65% return, which is significantly higher than SGLP.L's -1.79% return.

PAWS.L

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.91%
• YTD: 5.65%
• 6M: 6.18%
• 1Y: 14.12%
• 3Y*: 12.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SGLP.L

• 1D: 2.85%
• 1M: -9.42%
• YTD: -1.79%
• 6M: -1.95%
• 1Y: 25.96%
• 3Y*: 26.66%
• 5Y*: 18.64%
• 10Y*: 13.00%

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

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PAWS.L Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc	5.65%	7.39%	14.93%	14.95%	-12.42%	7,269.00%
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A	-1.79%	53.60%	28.14%	7.26%	11.83%	0.43%

Correlation

The correlation between PAWS.L and SGLP.L is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2021	0.05

The correlation between PAWS.L and SGLP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (all time) to 0.19 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAWS.L

PAWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 46
PAWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
PAWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
PAWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 100
PAWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
PAWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 12

SGLP.L

SGLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 32
SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
SGLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
SGLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 38
SGLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
SGLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc (PAWS.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.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.

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.

	PAWS.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.00	1.09	-1.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	198.25	1.49	+196.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	87.34	1.22	+86.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.14	1.13	-0.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.51	3.52	-3.01

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAWS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.00, which is lower than the SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAWS.L and SGLP.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.

Drawdowns

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAWS.L drawdown since its inception was -99.03%, which is greater than SGLP.L's maximum drawdown of -63.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWS.L and SGLP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAWS.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.03%	-63.75%	-35.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-99.02%	-22.82%	-76.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-99.03%	-22.82%	-76.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.82%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-22.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.17%	-20.62%	+17.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.66%	-31.72%	+24.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	26.63%	7.35%	+19.28%

Volatility

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc (PAWS.L) is 3.50%, while Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) has a volatility of 6.68%. This indicates that PAWS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAWS.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	6.68%	-3.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	653.26%	20.61%	+632.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19,679.03%	23.66%	+19,655.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9,948.20%	21.71%	+9,926.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9,948.20%	18.76%	+9,929.44%

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAWS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLP.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PAWS.L vs. SGLP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither PAWS.L nor SGLP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAWS.L and SGLP.L in my portfolio?

PAWS.L and SGLP.L have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PAWS.L or SGLP.L?

On fees, SGLP.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAWS.L or SGLP.L?

SGLP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for PAWS.L.

What is the main difference between PAWS.L and SGLP.L?

PAWS.L is categorized as Global Equities, while SGLP.L is Precious Metals. PAWS.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while SGLP.L tracks Gold. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for PAWS.L and 0.12% for SGLP.L.