ROLG.L vs. RICI.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ROLG.L (iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD) and RICI.L (Market Access Rogers International Commodity UCITS ETF) are both Commodities funds - ROLG.L tracks the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity while RICI.L tracks the Rogers International Commodity (RICI). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ROLG.L returned 14.55%/yr vs 13.77%/yr for RICI.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ROLG.L charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for RICI.L.

Performance

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L - 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 Market Access Rogers International Commodity UCITS ETF (RICI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ROLG.L achieves a 27.75% return, which is significantly lower than RICI.L's 32.73% 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*: —

RICI.L

• 1D: -1.29%
• 1M: -3.28%
• YTD: 32.73%
• 6M: 31.58%
• 1Y: 43.29%
• 3Y*: 11.94%
• 5Y*: 13.77%
• 10Y*: —

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

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ROLG.L iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD	27.75%	8.64%	6.25%	-7.36%	30.51%	29.23%	11.99%
RICI.L Market Access Rogers International Commodity UCITS ETF	32.73%	-0.85%	6.32%	-10.69%	30.66%	42.40%	19.41%

Correlation

The correlation between ROLG.L and RICI.L is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2020	0.84

The correlation between ROLG.L and RICI.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L — 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: 83
ROLG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ROLG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
ROLG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 80
ROLG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
ROLG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 87

RICI.L

RICI.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
RICI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
RICI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
RICI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 63
RICI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
RICI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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. RICI.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 Market Access Rogers International Commodity UCITS ETF (RICI.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	RICI.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	2.04	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.27	2.56	+0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.38	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.47	5.16	+1.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.28	11.22	+7.06
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. RICI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROLG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is comparable to the RICI.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROLG.L and RICI.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ROLG.L	RICI.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65	2.04	+0.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82	0.74	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.97	-0.38

Drawdowns

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROLG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.66%, smaller than the maximum RICI.L drawdown of -26.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROLG.L and RICI.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ROLG.L	RICI.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.66%	-26.97%	+4.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.81%	-8.35%	+1.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.27%	-16.40%	+3.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.85%	-26.97%	+7.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.56%	-5.90%	+1.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.98%	-12.19%	+3.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.42%	3.85%	-1.43%

Volatility

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) is 5.90%, while Market Access Rogers International Commodity UCITS ETF (RICI.L) has a volatility of 7.17%. This indicates that ROLG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RICI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ROLG.L	RICI.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.90%	7.17%	-1.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.98%	18.33%	-4.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.69%	21.17%	-4.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.69%	18.73%	-1.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.98%	18.88%	-1.90%

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ROLG.L has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than RICI.L's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

ROLG.L vs. RICI.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ROLG.L nor RICI.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ROLG.L and RICI.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, ROLG.L and RICI.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, ROLG.L or RICI.L?

On fees, ROLG.L is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ROLG.L or RICI.L?

ROLG.L is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for RICI.L.

What is the main difference between ROLG.L and RICI.L?

ROLG.L tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity, while RICI.L tracks Rogers International Commodity (RICI). They also come from different issuers: iShares and China Post Global. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for ROLG.L and 0.60% for RICI.L.