PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMLP.L achieves a 26.71% return, which is significantly higher than RMAU.L's 3.41% return.


PMLP.L

1D
1.96%
1M
1.75%
YTD
26.71%
6M
26.31%
1Y
28.41%
3Y*
22.73%
5Y*
19.87%
10Y*

RMAU.L

1D
-1.19%
1M
-3.16%
YTD
3.41%
6M
4.60%
1Y
33.22%
3Y*
27.70%
5Y*
19.56%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
PMLP.L
HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF
26.71%-1.40%35.81%7.61%35.33%34.88%8.45%
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
3.41%52.84%28.16%7.63%11.68%-3.23%-8.21%

Correlation

The correlation between PMLP.L and RMAU.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

0.04

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

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2020

0.01

The correlation between PMLP.L and RMAU.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.04 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMLP.L
PMLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

RMAU.L
RMAU.L Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
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.

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.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.


PMLP.LRMAU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.27

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.61

1.81

+0.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.58

4.98

+2.60

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMLP.L and RMAU.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


PMLP.LRMAU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.50

1.37

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.02

1.17

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.28

0.80

+0.48

Drawdowns

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMLP.L drawdown since its inception was -20.50%, smaller than the maximum RMAU.L drawdown of -23.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMLP.L and RMAU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PMLP.LRMAU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.50%

-23.24%

+2.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.82%

-18.32%

+7.50%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.50%

-18.32%

-2.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.50%

-18.32%

-2.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.31%

-16.61%

+12.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.88%

-6.61%

+0.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.73%

6.66%

-2.93%

Volatility

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Volatility Comparison

HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) has a higher volatility of 7.40% compared to The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) at 6.12%. This indicates that PMLP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RMAU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PMLP.LRMAU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.40%

6.12%

+1.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.48%

21.27%

-5.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.87%

24.11%

-5.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.86%

17.04%

+2.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.34%

20.71%

+0.63%

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMLP.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAU.L's 0.22% expense ratio.


Dividends

PMLP.L vs. RMAU.L - Dividend Comparison

PMLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.74%, while RMAU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
PMLP.L
HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF
2.74%3.31%3.37%6.48%6.12%6.57%4.17%
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PMLP.L and RMAU.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, RMAU.L is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RMAU.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for PMLP.L.

PMLP.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while RMAU.L is Commodities. PMLP.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for PMLP.L and 0.22% for RMAU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMLP.L and RMAU.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