RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L
RMAU.L (The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities) and EGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - RMAU.L is a Commodities fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price, while EGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RMAU.L returned 18.44%/yr vs 18.58%/yr for EGLN.L. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RMAU.L charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for EGLN.L.
Performance
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
RMAU.L is traded in USD, while EGLN.L is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the EGLN.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RMAU.L having a 3.70% return and EGLN.L slightly lower at 3.64%.
RMAU.L
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -2.38%
- YTD
- 3.70%
- 6M
- 6.00%
- 1Y
- 32.20%
- 3Y*
- 31.36%
- 5Y*
- 18.44%
- 10Y*
- —
EGLN.L
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- -2.30%
- YTD
- 3.64%
- 6M
- 6.03%
- 1Y
- 32.42%
- 3Y*
- 31.51%
- 5Y*
- 18.58%
- 10Y*
- —
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RMAU.L The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities | 3.70% | 64.57% | 25.96% | 13.29% | -0.19% | -4.14% | 14.46% |
EGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 3.64% | 65.63% | 26.01% | 12.82% | -0.37% | -3.23% | 14.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between RMAU.L and EGLN.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2020 | 0.87 |
The correlation between RMAU.L and EGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.87 (all time) to 0.97 (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
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
RMAU.L
EGLN.L
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (EGLN.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.
| RMAU.L | EGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.26 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.77 | 1.87 | -0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.69 | 4.78 | -0.09 |
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
| RMAU.L | EGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.29 | 1.33 | -0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.06 | 1.07 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.81 | 0.94 | -0.12 |
Drawdowns
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RMAU.L drawdown since its inception was -21.56%, roughly equal to the maximum EGLN.L drawdown of -21.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAU.L and EGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RMAU.L | EGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.56% | -21.33% | -0.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.15% | -17.28% | -0.87% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.15% | -17.28% | -0.87% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.17% | -21.26% | +0.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.95% | -15.77% | -0.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.09% | -5.99% | -1.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.84% | 6.76% | +0.08% |
Volatility
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) has a higher volatility of 6.42% compared to iShares Physical Gold ETC (EGLN.L) at 6.07%. This indicates that RMAU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RMAU.L | EGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.42% | 6.07% | +0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.86% | 20.98% | +0.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.82% | 24.27% | +0.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.62% | 17.44% | +0.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.34% | 15.64% | +5.70% |
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RMAU.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than EGLN.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
RMAU.L vs. EGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither RMAU.L nor EGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.97, RMAU.L and EGLN.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
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 0.25% for EGLN.L.
RMAU.L is categorized as Commodities, while EGLN.L is Gold. RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while EGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAU.L and 0.25% for EGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for RMAU.L and EGLN.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