RNMBF vs. GC=F

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Rheinmetall AG (RNMBF) and Gold (GC=F).

Performance

RNMBF vs. GC=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rheinmetall AG (RNMBF) and Gold (GC=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

RNMBF vs. GC=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RNMBF Rheinmetall AG	-1.77%	189.47%	106.03%	62.49%	112.89%	16.07%	8.13%	0.00%
GC=F Gold	10.61%	64.52%	27.48%	13.34%	-0.43%	-3.47%	24.59%	0.80%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RNMBF achieves a -1.77% return, which is significantly lower than GC=F's 10.61% return.

RNMBF

• 1D: 6.62%
• 1M: -6.69%
• YTD: -1.77%
• 6M: -22.48%
• 1Y: 25.49%
• 3Y*: 85.65%
• 5Y*: 89.58%
• 10Y*: —

GC=F

• 1D: 2.95%
• 1M: -9.63%
• YTD: 10.61%
• 6M: 23.71%
• 1Y: 53.41%
• 3Y*: 34.44%
• 5Y*: 22.61%
• 10Y*: 14.62%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

RNMBF vs. GC=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

RNMBF

RNMBF Risk / Return Rank: 57
RNMBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
RNMBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
RNMBF Omega Ratio Rank: 52
RNMBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
RNMBF Martin Ratio Rank: 61

GC=F

GC=F Risk / Return Rank: 91
GC=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
GC=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
GC=F Omega Ratio Rank: 94
GC=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
GC=F Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

RNMBF vs. GC=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rheinmetall AG (RNMBF) and Gold (GC=F). 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.

	RNMBF	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	1.85	-1.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.01	2.26	-1.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.34	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.89	2.74	-1.85
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.07	10.15	-8.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RNMBF vs. GC=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNMBF Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the GC=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNMBF and GC=F, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RNMBF	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	1.85	-1.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.83	1.25	+0.57
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.89	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.56	0.64	+0.92

Correlation

The correlation between RNMBF and GC=F is 0.08, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Drawdowns

RNMBF vs. GC=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNMBF drawdown since its inception was -36.24%, smaller than the maximum GC=F drawdown of -44.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNMBF and GC=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	RNMBF	GC=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.24%	-44.36%	+8.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.51%	-17.73%	-13.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.24%	-20.43%	-15.81%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.87%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.91%	-10.04%	-12.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.00%	-13.03%	+5.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.51%	4.78%	+8.73%

Volatility

RNMBF vs. GC=F - Volatility Comparison

Rheinmetall AG (RNMBF) has a higher volatility of 16.71% compared to Gold (GC=F) at 11.29%. This indicates that RNMBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GC=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RNMBF	GC=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.71%	11.29%	+5.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.93%	24.59%	+10.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.78%	27.77%	+23.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.30%	17.96%	+31.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	48.59%	16.36%	+32.23%