RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L
RMAP.L (HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC) and AUCP.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) are both Gold funds - RMAP.L tracks the Gold while AUCP.L tracks the STOXX Global Gold Miners. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RMAP.L returned 18.63%/yr vs 23.87%/yr for AUCP.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RMAP.L charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for AUCP.L.
Performance
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RMAP.L achieves a -5.00% return, which is significantly higher than AUCP.L's -10.22% return.
RMAP.L
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- -9.14%
- YTD
- -5.00%
- 6M
- -8.44%
- 1Y
- 24.57%
- 3Y*
- 25.90%
- 5Y*
- 18.63%
- 10Y*
- —
AUCP.L
- 1D
- 1.39%
- 1M
- -11.29%
- YTD
- -10.22%
- 6M
- -14.31%
- 1Y
- 55.82%
- 3Y*
- 45.12%
- 5Y*
- 23.87%
- 10Y*
- 13.49%
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RMAP.L HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC | -5.00% | 53.50% | 27.99% | 7.09% | 11.74% | -2.96% | -12.44% |
AUCP.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF | -10.22% | 161.99% | 20.20% | 8.69% | -4.04% | -8.91% | 20.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between RMAP.L and AUCP.L is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2020 | 0.69 |
The correlation between RMAP.L and AUCP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (5 years) to 0.79 (1 year), 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
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L — Risk / Return Rank
RMAP.L
AUCP.L
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - 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 L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.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.
| RMAP.L | AUCP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | 1.21 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.05 | 1.56 | -0.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.94 | 4.09 | -1.15 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RMAP.L drawdown since its inception was -24.37%, smaller than the maximum AUCP.L drawdown of -81.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAP.L and AUCP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RMAP.L | AUCP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.37% | -81.66% | +57.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.34% | -35.61% | +12.27% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.34% | -35.61% | +12.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.34% | -39.38% | +16.04% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.27% | -32.88% | +9.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.27% | -45.85% | +36.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.34% | 13.60% | -5.26% |
Volatility
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) is 8.09%, while L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) has a volatility of 17.90%. This indicates that RMAP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AUCP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RMAP.L | AUCP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.09% | 17.90% | -9.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.09% | 37.14% | -16.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.97% | 46.44% | -22.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.78% | 39.29% | -17.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.61% | 36.09% | -13.48% |
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RMAP.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than AUCP.L's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
RMAP.L vs. AUCP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither RMAP.L nor AUCP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
RMAP.L and AUCP.L have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
RMAP.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCP.L.
RMAP.L tracks Gold, while AUCP.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAP.L and 0.55% for AUCP.L.
Find the right allocation for RMAP.L and AUCP.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