PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) and BNP Paribas Easy FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Developed Green CTB UCITS ETF EUR Capitalisation (ESAD.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

RMAU.L is traded in USD, while ESAD.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the ESAD.DE values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMAU.L achieves a 0.42% return, which is significantly lower than ESAD.DE's 6.41% return.


RMAU.L

1D
-0.44%
1M
-8.12%
YTD
0.42%
6M
3.09%
1Y
29.71%
3Y*
29.86%
5Y*
17.74%
10Y*

ESAD.DE

1D
0.11%
1M
-2.90%
YTD
6.41%
6M
7.59%
1Y
9.03%
3Y*
7.70%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
0.42%64.59%25.96%13.29%-6.53%
ESAD.DE
BNP Paribas Easy FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Developed Green CTB UCITS ETF EUR Capitalisation
6.41%8.59%-2.38%11.05%-22.49%

Correlation

The correlation between RMAU.L and ESAD.DE is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022

0.26

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. ESAD.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMAU.L
RMAU.L Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

ESAD.DE
ESAD.DE Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
ESAD.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESAD.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESAD.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
ESAD.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESAD.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - 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 BNP Paribas Easy FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Developed Green CTB UCITS ETF EUR Capitalisation (ESAD.DE). 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.LESAD.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.13

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.59

0.87

+0.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.21

3.09

+1.12

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is higher than the ESAD.DE Sharpe Ratio of 0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMAU.L and ESAD.DE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RMAU.LESAD.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.19

0.74

+0.45

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

-0.04

+1.00

Drawdowns

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMAU.L drawdown since its inception was -21.25%, smaller than the maximum ESAD.DE drawdown of -32.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAU.L and ESAD.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RMAU.LESAD.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.25%

-32.39%

+11.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.60%

-10.64%

-7.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.60%

-17.85%

-0.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.60%

-5.82%

-12.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.87%

-17.34%

+10.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.04%

2.99%

+4.05%

Volatility

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Volatility Comparison

The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) has a higher volatility of 6.16% compared to BNP Paribas Easy FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Developed Green CTB UCITS ETF EUR Capitalisation (ESAD.DE) at 3.46%. This indicates that RMAU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ESAD.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RMAU.LESAD.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.16%

3.46%

+2.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.96%

9.74%

+12.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.99%

12.48%

+12.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.50%

16.51%

+0.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.76%

16.51%

+1.25%

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMAU.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than ESAD.DE's 0.41% expense ratio.


Dividends

RMAU.L vs. ESAD.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither RMAU.L nor ESAD.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


RMAU.L and ESAD.DE have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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 0.41% for ESAD.DE.

RMAU.L is categorized as Commodities, while ESAD.DE is REIT. RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while ESAD.DE tracks FTSE EPRA Nareit Developed Green EU CTB. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and BNP Paribas. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAU.L and 0.41% for ESAD.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RMAU.L and ESAD.DE

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