RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L
RMAU.L (The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities) and ROLG.L (iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD) are both Commodities funds - RMAU.L tracks the LBMA Gold PM Price while ROLG.L tracks the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RMAU.L returned 17.43%/yr vs 11.72%/yr for ROLG.L. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMAU.L charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for ROLG.L.
Performance
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
RMAU.L is traded in USD, while ROLG.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the ROLG.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 -6.64% return, which is significantly lower than ROLG.L's 16.13% return.
RMAU.L
- 1D
- 0.48%
- 1M
- -10.68%
- YTD
- -6.64%
- 6M
- -10.49%
- 1Y
- 20.88%
- 3Y*
- 27.51%
- 5Y*
- 17.43%
- 10Y*
- —
ROLG.L
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- -10.18%
- YTD
- 16.13%
- 6M
- 14.48%
- 1Y
- 27.75%
- 3Y*
- 13.30%
- 5Y*
- 11.72%
- 10Y*
- —
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RMAU.L The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities | -6.64% | 64.59% | 25.96% | 13.29% | -0.19% | -4.17% | 19.56% |
ROLG.L iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD | 16.13% | 16.86% | 4.55% | -2.47% | 16.56% | 28.06% | 7.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between RMAU.L and ROLG.L is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2020 | 0.35 |
The correlation between RMAU.L and ROLG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.24 (1 year) to 0.36 (3 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. ROLG.L — Risk / Return Rank
RMAU.L
ROLG.L
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.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 Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| RMAU.L | ROLG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.29 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.84 | 2.00 | -1.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.44 | 9.24 | -6.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RMAU.L drawdown since its inception was -24.69%, smaller than the maximum ROLG.L drawdown of -47.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAU.L and ROLG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RMAU.L | ROLG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.69% | -47.02% | +22.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.69% | -13.82% | -10.87% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.69% | -22.26% | -2.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.69% | -22.26% | -2.43% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.33% | -13.30% | -11.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.99% | -17.74% | +10.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.52% | 3.00% | +5.52% |
Volatility
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L - Volatility Comparison
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) has a higher volatility of 9.12% compared to iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) at 4.94%. This indicates that RMAU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ROLG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RMAU.L | ROLG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.12% | 4.94% | +4.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.15% | 14.64% | +8.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.99% | 16.22% | +9.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.72% | 22.45% | -4.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.96% | 22.20% | -4.24% |
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RMAU.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than ROLG.L's 0.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
RMAU.L vs. ROLG.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither RMAU.L nor ROLG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
RMAU.L and ROLG.L have a correlation of 0.24, 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 0.28% for ROLG.L.
RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while ROLG.L tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAU.L and 0.28% for ROLG.L.
Find the right allocation for RMAU.L and ROLG.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