SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L
SGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) and EQGB.L (Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - SGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price, while EQGB.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SGLN.L returned 19.24%/yr vs 15.56%/yr for EQGB.L. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. SGLN.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EQGB.L.
Performance
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SGLN.L achieves a 1.38% return, which is significantly lower than EQGB.L's 15.56% return.
SGLN.L
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -6.00%
- YTD
- 1.38%
- 6M
- 3.07%
- 1Y
- 31.70%
- 3Y*
- 27.57%
- 5Y*
- 19.24%
- 10Y*
- 13.68%
EQGB.L
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- YTD
- 15.56%
- 6M
- 14.80%
- 1Y
- 34.98%
- 3Y*
- 26.37%
- 5Y*
- 15.56%
- 10Y*
- —
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 1.38% | 53.66% | 28.20% | 7.24% | 11.84% | -2.82% | 19.93% | 14.63% | 4.36% | -2.35% |
EQGB.L Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc | 15.56% | 19.59% | 26.12% | 53.92% | -35.07% | 27.68% | 45.43% | 41.84% | -2.42% | 5.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between SGLN.L and EQGB.L is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2017 | -0.07 |
The correlation between SGLN.L and EQGB.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (5 years) to 0.15 (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. EQGB.L — Risk / Return Rank
SGLN.L
EQGB.L
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.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.
| SGLN.L | EQGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.82 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.38 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.75 | 3.07 | -1.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.61 | 10.97 | -6.37 |
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
| SGLN.L | EQGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.35 | 2.18 | -0.82 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 | 0.74 | +0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.73 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 0.92 | -0.68 |
Drawdowns
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SGLN.L drawdown since its inception was -53.23%, which is greater than EQGB.L's maximum drawdown of -36.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLN.L and EQGB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SGLN.L | EQGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.23% | -36.77% | -16.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.04% | -11.33% | -6.71% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.33% | -22.76% | +2.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.33% | -36.77% | +16.44% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.30% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.04% | -3.57% | -14.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.71% | -7.45% | -17.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.86% | 3.18% | +3.68% |
Volatility
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) is 4.84%, while Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) has a volatility of 5.45%. This indicates that SGLN.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SGLN.L | EQGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.84% | 5.45% | -0.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.20% | 12.15% | +8.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.35% | 16.02% | +7.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.74% | 20.98% | +0.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.80% | 21.24% | -2.44% |
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SGLN.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than EQGB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
SGLN.L vs. EQGB.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SGLN.L nor EQGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQGB.L Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 4.16% |
SGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SGLN.L and EQGB.L have a correlation of 0.15, 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 0.35% for EQGB.L.
SGLN.L is categorized as Gold, while EQGB.L is Nasdaq-100. SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price, while EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for SGLN.L and 0.35% for EQGB.L.
Find the right allocation for SGLN.L and EQGB.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