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

Performance

RMAU.L vs. XDEM.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 Xtrackers MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF 1C (XDEM.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

RMAU.L is traded in USD, while XDEM.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the XDEM.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 XDEM.DE's 21.33% 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*

XDEM.DE

1D
-0.85%
1M
5.31%
YTD
21.33%
6M
22.26%
1Y
34.06%
3Y*
29.58%
5Y*
13.67%
10Y*
15.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
0.42%64.59%25.96%13.29%-0.19%-4.17%19.56%
XDEM.DE
Xtrackers MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF 1C
21.33%22.02%30.33%11.58%-18.60%15.17%20.37%

Correlation

The correlation between RMAU.L and XDEM.DE is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.27

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

0.19

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

0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2020

0.18

The correlation between RMAU.L and XDEM.DE shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (5 years) to 0.27 (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. XDEM.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

XDEM.DE
XDEM.DE Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
XDEM.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDEM.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDEM.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
XDEM.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDEM.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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. XDEM.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 Xtrackers MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF 1C (XDEM.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.LXDEM.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.34

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.59

2.90

-1.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.21

12.19

-7.98

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

The current RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the XDEM.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMAU.L and XDEM.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.LXDEM.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.19

1.89

-0.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.01

0.73

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.91

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

0.86

+0.10

Drawdowns

RMAU.L vs. XDEM.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMAU.L drawdown since its inception was -21.25%, smaller than the maximum XDEM.DE drawdown of -31.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMAU.L and XDEM.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RMAU.LXDEM.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.25%

-31.42%

+10.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.60%

-11.58%

-7.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.60%

-19.87%

+1.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.17%

-29.82%

+8.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.60%

-0.85%

-17.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.87%

-6.75%

-0.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.04%

2.75%

+4.29%

Volatility

RMAU.L vs. XDEM.DE - Volatility Comparison

The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF 1C (XDEM.DE) have volatilities of 6.16% and 6.16%, 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.LXDEM.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.16%

6.16%

0.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.96%

15.31%

+6.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.99%

17.81%

+7.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.50%

18.43%

-0.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.76%

18.57%

-0.81%

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

RMAU.L has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than XDEM.DE'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. XDEM.DE - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


RMAU.L and XDEM.DE have a correlation of 0.27, 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 0.25% for XDEM.DE.

RMAU.L is categorized as Commodities, while XDEM.DE is Momentum. RMAU.L tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while XDEM.DE tracks MSCI World Momentum Index. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for RMAU.L and 0.25% for XDEM.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RMAU.L and XDEM.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