RMAP.L vs. ARMY

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RMAP.L (HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC) and ARMY (HANetf Future of European Defence Screened UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RMAP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while ARMY is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the VettaFi European Future of Defence Screened Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMAP.L charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ARMY.

Performance

RMAP.L vs. ARMY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) and HANetf Future of European Defence Screened UCITS ETF (ARMY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

RMAP.L is traded in GBp, while ARMY is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the ARMY values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

RMAP.L

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: -2.94%
• YTD: 3.07%
• 6M: 4.24%
• 1Y: 33.07%
• 3Y*: 27.73%
• 5Y*: 19.76%
• 10Y*: —

ARMY

• 1D: -2.47%
• 1M: -0.57%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMAP.L vs. ARMY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
RMAP.L HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC	-5.80%
ARMY HANetf Future of European Defence Screened UCITS ETF	-3.39%

Correlation

The correlation between RMAP.L and ARMY is 0.32, 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 Apr 1, 2026	0.32

Return for Risk

RMAP.L vs. ARMY — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMAP.L

RMAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 27
RMAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
RMAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
RMAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 47
RMAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
RMAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

RMAP.L vs. ARMY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) and HANetf Future of European Defence Screened UCITS ETF (ARMY). 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.

	RMAP.L	ARMY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.69	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.26	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.21	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.41	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RMAP.L	ARMY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	-0.57	+1.27

Drawdowns

RMAP.L vs. ARMY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMAP.L drawdown since its inception was -27.31%, which is greater than ARMY's maximum drawdown of -12.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAP.L and ARMY.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMAP.L	ARMY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.31%	-12.87%	-14.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.60%	-9.24%	-10.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.27%	-5.65%	-1.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.70%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RMAP.L	ARMY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.07%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.91%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.58%	32.09%	+15.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.84%	32.09%	-7.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.74%	32.09%	-8.35%

RMAP.L vs. ARMY - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMAP.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than ARMY's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMAP.L vs. ARMY - Dividend Comparison

Neither RMAP.L nor ARMY has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMAP.L and ARMY in my portfolio?

RMAP.L and ARMY have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RMAP.L or ARMY?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, RMAP.L or ARMY?

RMAP.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ARMY.

What is the main difference between RMAP.L and ARMY?

RMAP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while ARMY is Aerospace & Defense. RMAP.L tracks Gold, while ARMY tracks VettaFi European Future of Defence Screened Index. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAP.L and 0.39% for ARMY.