ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L
ROLG.L (iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD) and IGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - ROLG.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity, while IGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ROLG.L returned 14.55%/yr vs 19.89%/yr for IGLN.L. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ROLG.L charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IGLN.L.
Performance
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ROLG.L is traded in GBP, while IGLN.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IGLN.L 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 27.75% return, which is significantly higher than IGLN.L's 4.12% return.
ROLG.L
- 1D
- -1.64%
- 1M
- -1.90%
- YTD
- 27.75%
- 6M
- 27.51%
- 1Y
- 44.31%
- 3Y*
- 14.24%
- 5Y*
- 14.55%
- 10Y*
- —
IGLN.L
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- YTD
- 4.12%
- 6M
- 5.29%
- 1Y
- 33.65%
- 3Y*
- 28.24%
- 5Y*
- 19.89%
- 10Y*
- 14.26%
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ROLG.L iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD | 27.75% | 8.64% | 6.25% | -7.36% | 30.51% | 29.23% | -2.41% | 1.84% | -9.45% |
IGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 4.12% | 53.17% | 28.35% | 7.77% | 11.79% | -3.12% | 20.51% | 13.78% | 8.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between ROLG.L and IGLN.L is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2018 | 0.29 |
The correlation between ROLG.L and IGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (1 year) to 0.29 (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
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
ROLG.L
IGLN.L
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - 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 iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.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.
| ROLG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.28 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.47 | 1.91 | +4.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.28 | 5.10 | +13.18 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ROLG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.65 | 1.39 | +1.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.82 | 1.18 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.87 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 0.52 | +0.07 |
Drawdowns
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ROLG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.66%, smaller than the maximum IGLN.L drawdown of -41.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROLG.L and IGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ROLG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.66% | -41.86% | +19.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.81% | -17.53% | +10.72% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.27% | -17.53% | +4.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.85% | -17.53% | -2.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -22.37% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.56% | -15.75% | +11.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.98% | -14.94% | +5.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.42% | 6.59% | -4.17% |
Volatility
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (IGLN.L) have volatilities of 5.90% and 5.91%, 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
| ROLG.L | IGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.90% | 5.91% | -0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.98% | 21.10% | -7.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.69% | 24.06% | -7.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.69% | 16.80% | +0.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.98% | 16.34% | +0.64% |
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ROLG.L has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than IGLN.L's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
ROLG.L vs. IGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ROLG.L nor IGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
ROLG.L and IGLN.L have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IGLN.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for ROLG.L.
ROLG.L is categorized as Commodities, while IGLN.L is Gold. ROLG.L tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity, while IGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for ROLG.L and 0.25% for IGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for ROLG.L and IGLN.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