PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Global Inflation Linked Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SGIL.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

SGIL.L is traded in GBP, while SGLN.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SGLN.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SGIL.L achieves a 1.14% return, which is significantly lower than SGLN.L's 3.89% return. Over the past 10 years, SGIL.L has underperformed SGLN.L with an annualized return of 1.78%, while SGLN.L has yielded a comparatively higher 14.27% annualized return.


SGIL.L

1D
0.01%
1M
0.35%
YTD
1.14%
6M
0.44%
1Y
4.97%
3Y*
0.67%
5Y*
-1.24%
10Y*
1.78%

SGLN.L

1D
0.70%
1M
-1.36%
YTD
3.89%
6M
5.42%
1Y
33.75%
3Y*
28.17%
5Y*
20.12%
10Y*
14.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SGIL.L
iShares Global Inflation Linked Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
1.14%1.15%-1.44%-0.60%-12.55%4.21%8.42%4.53%1.56%-1.38%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
3.89%53.66%28.20%7.24%11.84%-2.57%19.62%14.63%4.36%1.68%

Correlation

The correlation between SGIL.L and SGLN.L is 0.00, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.00

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

0.15

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

0.25

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011

0.38

Over the past year, the correlation between SGIL.L and SGLN.L has dropped to 0.00 - well below their long-term average of 0.38, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

SGIL.L
SGIL.L Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
SGIL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGIL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGIL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
SGIL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGIL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

SGLN.L
SGLN.L Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Inflation Linked Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SGIL.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.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.


SGIL.LSGLN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.46

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.29

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.56

1.91

-0.35

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.06

5.05

-1.98

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SGIL.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is lower than the SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGIL.L and SGLN.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SGIL.LSGLN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.98

1.45

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.15

1.23

-1.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.90

-0.70

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.55

-0.14

Drawdowns

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGIL.L drawdown since its inception was -20.23%, smaller than the maximum SGLN.L drawdown of -41.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGIL.L and SGLN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SGIL.LSGLN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.23%

-41.71%

+21.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.17%

-17.57%

+14.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.63%

-17.57%

+11.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.23%

-17.57%

-2.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.23%

-21.91%

+1.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.00%

-16.01%

+1.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.79%

-14.76%

+7.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.62%

6.67%

-5.05%

Volatility

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Inflation Linked Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SGIL.L) is 1.13%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) has a volatility of 5.08%. This indicates that SGIL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SGIL.LSGLN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.13%

5.08%

-3.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.56%

20.08%

-16.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.03%

23.19%

-18.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.38%

16.30%

-7.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.97%

15.78%

-6.81%

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SGIL.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

SGIL.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither SGIL.L nor SGLN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


SGIL.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SGLN.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for SGIL.L.

SGIL.L is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while SGLN.L is Gold. SGIL.L tracks Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked TR USD, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for SGIL.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SGIL.L and SGLN.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