RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L
RMAP.L (HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC) and PIGI.L (HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RMAP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while PIGI.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RMAP.L returned 33.07% vs 16.04% for PIGI.L. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMAP.L charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for PIGI.L.
Performance
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RMAP.L achieves a 3.07% return, which is significantly lower than PIGI.L's 6.21% return.
RMAP.L
- 1D
- -1.18%
- 1M
- -2.94%
- YTD
- 3.07%
- 6M
- 4.24%
- 1Y
- 33.07%
- 3Y*
- 27.73%
- 5Y*
- 19.76%
- 10Y*
- —
PIGI.L
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 2.52%
- YTD
- 6.21%
- 6M
- 6.94%
- 1Y
- 16.04%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RMAP.L HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC | 3.07% | 28.57% |
PIGI.L HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF | 6.21% | 12.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between RMAP.L and PIGI.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 29, 2025 | 0.16 |
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. PIGI.L — Risk / Return Rank
RMAP.L
PIGI.L
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.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 HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF (PIGI.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.
| RMAP.L | PIGI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.39 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.21 | 2.70 | -1.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.41 | 9.18 | -6.77 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RMAP.L | PIGI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.69 | 1.99 | -1.29 |
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 | 2.11 | -1.41 |
Drawdowns
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RMAP.L drawdown since its inception was -27.31%, which is greater than PIGI.L's maximum drawdown of -6.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAP.L and PIGI.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RMAP.L | PIGI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.31% | -6.15% | -21.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.31% | -6.15% | -21.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.31% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -19.60% | -0.27% | -19.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.27% | -1.17% | -6.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.70% | 1.81% | +11.89% |
Volatility
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L - Volatility Comparison
HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) has a higher volatility of 5.07% compared to HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF (PIGI.L) at 1.45%. This indicates that RMAP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PIGI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RMAP.L | PIGI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.07% | 1.45% | +3.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.91% | 6.17% | +13.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 47.58% | 8.36% | +39.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.84% | 8.47% | +16.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.74% | 8.47% | +15.27% |
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RMAP.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than PIGI.L's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
RMAP.L vs. PIGI.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither RMAP.L nor PIGI.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
RMAP.L and PIGI.L have a correlation of 0.22, 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 0.69% for PIGI.L.
RMAP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while PIGI.L is Technology Equities. RMAP.L tracks Gold, while PIGI.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAP.L and 0.69% for PIGI.L.
Find the right allocation for RMAP.L and PIGI.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