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

Performance

SGLN.L vs. CEUG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) and iShares MSCI EMU UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CEUG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SGLN.L achieves a -1.83% return, which is significantly lower than CEUG.L's 11.57% return.


SGLN.L

1D
2.90%
1M
-9.40%
YTD
-1.83%
6M
-1.90%
1Y
25.94%
3Y*
26.65%
5Y*
18.64%
10Y*
13.01%

CEUG.L

1D
2.06%
1M
5.84%
YTD
11.57%
6M
13.31%
1Y
22.80%
3Y*
18.00%
5Y*
12.17%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
-1.83%53.66%28.20%7.24%11.84%-2.82%19.93%14.63%2.27%
CEUG.L
iShares MSCI EMU UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)
11.57%26.85%10.80%20.45%-10.50%22.91%-0.24%26.08%-12.18%

Correlation

The correlation between SGLN.L and CEUG.L is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.17

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

0.06

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

-0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 31, 2018

-0.09

The correlation between SGLN.L and CEUG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (all time) to 0.17 (1 year), 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

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

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

SGLN.L
SGLN.L Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

CEUG.L
CEUG.L Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
CEUG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEUG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEUG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
CEUG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEUG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) and iShares MSCI EMU UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CEUG.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


SGLN.LCEUG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.30

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.13

2.26

-1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.51

8.53

-5.02

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

The current SGLN.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the CEUG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGLN.L and CEUG.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...

Drawdowns

SGLN.L vs. CEUG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGLN.L drawdown since its inception was -53.23%, which is greater than CEUG.L's maximum drawdown of -38.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLN.L and CEUG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SGLN.LCEUG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.23%

-38.52%

-14.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.87%

-10.04%

-12.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.87%

-15.35%

-7.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.87%

-24.06%

+1.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-20.64%

0.00%

-20.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.70%

-5.50%

-19.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.37%

2.67%

+4.70%

Volatility

SGLN.L vs. CEUG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) has a higher volatility of 6.68% compared to iShares MSCI EMU UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CEUG.L) at 4.17%. This indicates that SGLN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEUG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SGLN.LCEUG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.68%

4.17%

+2.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.78%

11.63%

+9.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.82%

14.27%

+9.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.84%

16.25%

+5.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.84%

18.09%

+0.75%

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

Both SGLN.L and CEUG.L have an expense ratio of 0.12%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

SGLN.L vs. CEUG.L - Dividend Comparison

SGLN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEUG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.32%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
CEUG.L
iShares MSCI EMU UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)
2.32%2.53%2.81%2.73%2.84%1.81%1.77%3.05%0.38%
SGLN.L
iShares Physical Gold ETC
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


SGLN.L and CEUG.L have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.12% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SGLN.L and CEUG.L have the same expense ratio: 0.12% per year.

SGLN.L is categorized as Gold, while CEUG.L is Europe Equities. SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price, while CEUG.L tracks MSCI Europe NR EUR.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SGLN.L and CEUG.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