ROLG.L vs. GC=F

Last updated Apr 3, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) and Gold (GC=F).

ROLG.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity. It was launched on Sep 28, 2018.

Performance

ROLG.L vs. GC=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) and Gold (GC=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

ROLG.L vs. GC=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ROLG.L iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD	24.60%	8.64%	6.25%	-7.36%	30.51%	29.23%	-2.41%	1.84%	-9.45%
GC=F Gold	10.75%	52.80%	29.71%	7.67%	11.41%	-2.55%	20.93%	14.35%	8.28%

Different Trading Currencies

ROLG.L is traded in GBP, while GC=F is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GC=F values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ROLG.L achieves a 24.60% return, which is significantly higher than GC=F's 10.75% return.

ROLG.L

• 1D: 1.21%
• 1M: 6.84%
• YTD: 24.60%
• 6M: 30.77%
• 1Y: 29.79%
• 3Y*: 11.19%
• 5Y*: 16.29%
• 10Y*: —

GC=F

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: -7.01%
• YTD: 10.75%
• 6M: 24.44%
• 1Y: 47.20%
• 3Y*: 30.56%
• 5Y*: 23.29%
• 10Y*: 15.33%

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

Return for Risk

ROLG.L vs. GC=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

ROLG.L

ROLG.L Risk / Return Rank: 89
ROLG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
ROLG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
ROLG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
ROLG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
ROLG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 93

GC=F

GC=F Risk / Return Rank: 82
GC=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
GC=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GC=F Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GC=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
GC=F Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

ROLG.L vs. GC=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) 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.

	ROLG.L	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	1.72	+0.15
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	2.12	+0.30
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.34	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.18	2.72	+2.46
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.26	10.43	+4.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ROLG.L vs. GC=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROLG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the GC=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROLG.L 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

	ROLG.L	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.87	1.72	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93	1.34	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.90	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	0.69	-0.11

Correlation

The correlation between ROLG.L and GC=F is 0.31, 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

ROLG.L vs. GC=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROLG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.66%, smaller than the maximum GC=F drawdown of -40.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROLG.L and GC=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	ROLG.L	GC=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.66%	-44.36%	+21.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.81%	-17.73%	+10.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.85%	-20.43%	+0.58%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.87%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.41%	-11.58%	+10.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.13%	-13.03%	+3.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.31%	4.83%	-2.52%

Volatility

ROLG.L vs. GC=F - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) is 6.99%, while Gold (GC=F) has a volatility of 12.16%. This indicates that ROLG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GC=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ROLG.L	GC=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.99%	12.16%	-5.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.08%	24.15%	-12.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.84%	26.38%	-10.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.43%	17.24%	+0.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.87%	17.06%	-0.19%