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

Performance

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - 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 HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

RMAU.L is traded in USD, while PMLP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the PMLP.L 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 3.03% return, which is significantly lower than PMLP.L's 26.41% return.


RMAU.L

1D
-1.45%
1M
-4.23%
YTD
3.03%
6M
5.15%
1Y
32.29%
3Y*
30.94%
5Y*
18.29%
10Y*

PMLP.L

1D
1.69%
1M
0.68%
YTD
26.41%
6M
26.99%
1Y
27.55%
3Y*
25.86%
5Y*
18.61%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
3.03%64.57%25.96%13.29%-0.19%-4.14%-4.15%
PMLP.L
HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF
26.41%6.05%33.55%13.28%20.86%33.66%13.25%

Correlation

The correlation between RMAU.L and PMLP.L is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.05

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

0.08

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2020

0.08

The correlation between RMAU.L and PMLP.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.11 (5 years), 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. PMLP.L — 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: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

PMLP.L
PMLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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. PMLP.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 HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.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.LPMLP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.25

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.77

2.82

-1.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.76

7.43

-2.67

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is comparable to the PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMAU.L and PMLP.L, 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.LPMLP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.30

1.50

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.06

0.91

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.81

1.25

-0.44

Drawdowns

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMAU.L drawdown since its inception was -21.56%, which is greater than PMLP.L's maximum drawdown of -19.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAU.L and PMLP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RMAU.LPMLP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.56%

-19.85%

-1.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.15%

-9.73%

-8.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.15%

-17.48%

-0.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.17%

-19.85%

-1.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.50%

-4.36%

-12.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.08%

-4.66%

-2.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.77%

3.70%

+3.07%

Volatility

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - Volatility Comparison

The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) and HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) have volatilities of 6.47% and 6.80%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RMAU.LPMLP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.47%

6.80%

-0.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.86%

15.10%

+6.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.82%

18.32%

+6.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.63%

20.84%

-3.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.35%

22.38%

-1.03%

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMAU.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than PMLP.L's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

RMAU.L vs. PMLP.L - Dividend Comparison

RMAU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PMLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.74%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
PMLP.L
HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF
2.74%3.31%3.37%6.48%6.12%6.57%4.17%
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RMAU.L and PMLP.L have a correlation of -0.05, 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 0.40% for PMLP.L.

RMAU.L is categorized as Commodities, while PMLP.L is Energy Equities. RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while PMLP.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAU.L and 0.40% for PMLP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RMAU.L and PMLP.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