SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L
SGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) and IBTM.L (iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - SGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price, while IBTM.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 7-10 Year Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SGLN.L returned 13.68%/yr vs 1.38%/yr for IBTM.L. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SGLN.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IBTM.L.
Performance
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
SGLN.L is traded in GBp, while IBTM.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the IBTM.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 1.38% return, which is significantly higher than IBTM.L's -0.45% return. Over the past 10 years, SGLN.L has outperformed IBTM.L with an annualized return of 13.68%, while IBTM.L has yielded a comparatively lower 1.38% annualized 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%
IBTM.L
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 1.03%
- YTD
- -0.45%
- 6M
- -0.81%
- 1Y
- 5.41%
- 3Y*
- 0.62%
- 5Y*
- -0.02%
- 10Y*
- 1.38%
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.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% | 1.68% |
IBTM.L iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF (Dist) | -0.45% | 0.89% | 1.46% | -2.26% | -4.74% | -1.77% | 6.02% | 5.50% | 6.50% | -6.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between SGLN.L and IBTM.L is -0.04, 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 | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2011 | 0.36 |
The correlation between SGLN.L and IBTM.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.41 (10 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
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L — Risk / Return Rank
SGLN.L
IBTM.L
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) and iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF (Dist) (IBTM.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 | IBTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.15 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.75 | 0.97 | +0.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.61 | 2.30 | +2.31 |
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 | IBTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.35 | 0.86 | +0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 | -0.00 | +0.89 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.73 | 0.13 | +0.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 0.03 | +0.22 |
Drawdowns
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SGLN.L drawdown since its inception was -53.23%, roughly equal to the maximum IBTM.L drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLN.L and IBTM.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SGLN.L | IBTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.23% | -52.39% | -0.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.04% | -5.57% | -12.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.33% | -7.57% | -12.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.33% | -16.29% | -4.04% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.30% | -26.54% | +4.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.04% | -21.39% | +3.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.71% | -20.63% | -4.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.86% | 2.35% | +4.51% |
Volatility
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) has a higher volatility of 4.84% compared to iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF (Dist) (IBTM.L) at 1.59%. This indicates that SGLN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBTM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SGLN.L | IBTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.84% | 1.59% | +3.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.20% | 4.47% | +15.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.35% | 6.26% | +17.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.74% | 9.47% | +12.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.80% | 10.59% | +8.21% |
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SGLN.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is higher than IBTM.L's 0.07% 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
SGLN.L vs. IBTM.L - Dividend Comparison
SGLN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBTM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTM.L iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF (Dist) | 4.36% | 4.19% | 3.94% | 3.16% | 1.96% | 1.14% | 1.69% | 2.53% | 2.34% | 2.02% | 1.79% | 1.97% |
SGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SGLN.L and IBTM.L have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBTM.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBTM.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.12% for SGLN.L.
SGLN.L is categorized as Gold, while IBTM.L is Government Bonds. SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price, while IBTM.L tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 7-10 Year Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for SGLN.L and 0.07% for IBTM.L.
Find the right allocation for SGLN.L and IBTM.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