PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SGLP.L achieves a 3.24% return, which is significantly lower than ROLG.L's 29.88% return.


SGLP.L

1D
-1.17%
1M
-2.86%
YTD
3.24%
6M
4.38%
1Y
33.15%
3Y*
27.94%
5Y*
19.70%
10Y*
14.29%

ROLG.L

1D
0.70%
1M
1.14%
YTD
29.88%
6M
29.34%
1Y
45.86%
3Y*
15.28%
5Y*
14.93%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
SGLP.L
Invesco Physical Gold A
3.24%53.60%28.14%7.26%11.83%-2.88%19.99%14.65%8.86%
ROLG.L
iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD
29.88%8.64%6.25%-7.36%30.51%29.23%-2.41%1.84%-9.45%

Correlation

The correlation between SGLP.L and ROLG.L is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.21

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

0.34

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

0.32

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2018

0.33

The correlation between SGLP.L and ROLG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.21 (1 year) to 0.34 (3 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

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

SGLP.L
SGLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

ROLG.L
ROLG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
ROLG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ROLG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
ROLG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
ROLG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
ROLG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.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.


SGLP.LROLG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.49

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.84

6.70

-4.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.03

19.05

-14.03

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the ROLG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGLP.L and ROLG.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


SGLP.LROLG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.43

2.75

-1.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.22

0.84

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.91

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.53

0.60

-0.07

Drawdowns

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGLP.L drawdown since its inception was -38.83%, which is greater than ROLG.L's maximum drawdown of -22.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLP.L and ROLG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SGLP.LROLG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.83%

-22.66%

-16.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.89%

-6.81%

-11.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.89%

-13.27%

-4.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.89%

-19.85%

+1.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.55%

-2.97%

-13.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.37%

-8.98%

-4.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.58%

2.40%

+4.18%

Volatility

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) is 5.09%, while iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Swap UCITS ETF USD (ROLG.L) has a volatility of 5.84%. This indicates that SGLP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ROLG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SGLP.LROLG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.09%

5.84%

-0.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.90%

13.86%

+6.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.02%

16.60%

+6.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.11%

17.68%

-1.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.72%

16.98%

-1.26%

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

SGLP.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than ROLG.L's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

SGLP.L vs. ROLG.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


SGLP.L and ROLG.L have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

SGLP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for ROLG.L.

SGLP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while ROLG.L is Commodities. SGLP.L tracks Gold, while ROLG.L tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for SGLP.L and 0.28% for ROLG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SGLP.L and ROLG.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