RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L
Compare and contrast key facts about HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) and iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L).
RMAP.L and SSLN.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. RMAP.L is a passively managed fund by HANetf that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Feb 12, 2020. SSLN.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Silver. It was launched on Apr 8, 2011. Both RMAP.L and SSLN.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RMAP.L HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC | 9.42% | 53.50% | 28.00% | 7.09% | 11.74% | -2.81% | 10.34% |
SSLN.L iShares Physical Silver ETC | 5.00% | 130.26% | 23.21% | -6.20% | 15.75% | -11.64% | 36.70% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RMAP.L achieves a 9.42% return, which is significantly higher than SSLN.L's 5.00% return.
RMAP.L
- 1D
- 2.06%
- 1M
- -9.72%
- YTD
- 9.42%
- 6M
- 22.78%
- 1Y
- 44.95%
- 3Y*
- 29.59%
- 5Y*
- 22.75%
- 10Y*
- —
SSLN.L
- 1D
- 3.67%
- 1M
- -19.40%
- YTD
- 5.00%
- 6M
- 61.96%
- 1Y
- 112.26%
- 3Y*
- 41.88%
- 5Y*
- 25.65%
- 10Y*
- 17.91%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RMAP.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is higher than SSLN.L's 0.20% 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%.
Return for Risk
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
RMAP.L
SSLN.L
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.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 iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.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 | SSLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.93 | 2.15 | -1.22 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.52 | 2.43 | -0.91 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.40 | -0.04 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.63 | 2.92 | -1.29 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.68 | 9.12 | -5.44 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RMAP.L | SSLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93 | 2.15 | -1.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 | 0.80 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.62 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.76 | 0.18 | +0.59 |
Correlation
The correlation between RMAP.L and SSLN.L is 0.63, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither RMAP.L nor SSLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RMAP.L drawdown since its inception was -27.31%, smaller than the maximum SSLN.L drawdown of -69.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAP.L and SSLN.L.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| RMAP.L | SSLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.31% | -69.95% | +42.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.31% | -38.72% | +11.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.31% | -38.72% | +11.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -38.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.64% | -32.45% | +17.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.03% | -45.48% | +38.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.11% | 12.40% | -0.29% |
Volatility
RMAP.L vs. SSLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for HANetf The Royal Mint Responsibly Sourced Physical Gold ETC (RMAP.L) is 11.49%, while iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) has a volatility of 17.88%. This indicates that RMAP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SSLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| RMAP.L | SSLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.49% | 17.88% | -6.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 47.02% | 50.20% | -3.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 48.07% | 51.97% | -3.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.72% | 32.20% | -7.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.89% | 29.12% | -5.23% |