SGLP.L vs. TIGB.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) and TIGB.L (Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF GBP Hedged Dist) are both exchange-traded funds - SGLP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while TIGB.L is a Short-Term Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg US Treasury Coupons Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SGLP.L returned 28.15%/yr vs 4.48%/yr for TIGB.L. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SGLP.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for TIGB.L.

Performance

SGLP.L vs. TIGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF GBP Hedged Dist (TIGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SGLP.L achieves a 3.97% return, which is significantly higher than TIGB.L's 1.42% return.

SGLP.L

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: -1.36%
• YTD: 3.97%
• 6M: 5.45%
• 1Y: 33.77%
• 3Y*: 28.15%
• 5Y*: 19.87%
• 10Y*: 14.26%

TIGB.L

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 1.42%
• 6M: 1.75%
• 1Y: 3.78%
• 3Y*: 4.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A	3.97%	53.60%	28.14%	7.26%	13.26%
TIGB.L Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF GBP Hedged Dist	1.42%	4.10%	4.94%	4.27%	0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between SGLP.L and TIGB.L is -0.07, 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	-0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2022	0.07

The correlation between SGLP.L and TIGB.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

SGLP.L vs. TIGB.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: 40
SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
SGLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
SGLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 47
SGLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
SGLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 34

TIGB.L

TIGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
TIGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
TIGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
TIGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 98
TIGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
TIGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. TIGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF GBP Hedged Dist (TIGB.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.L	TIGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	3.87	-2.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.90	6.05	-4.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	2.34	-1.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.88	12.51	-10.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.06	73.64	-68.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the TIGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGLP.L and TIGB.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SGLP.L	TIGB.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	3.87	-2.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.23	—	—
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	5.48	-4.94

Drawdowns

SGLP.L vs. TIGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGLP.L drawdown since its inception was -38.83%, which is greater than TIGB.L's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLP.L and TIGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	SGLP.L	TIGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.83%	-0.50%	-38.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.89%	-0.30%	-17.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.89%	-0.30%	-17.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.89%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.34%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.97%	0.00%	-15.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.37%	-0.03%	-13.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.65%	0.05%	+6.60%

Volatility

SGLP.L vs. TIGB.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) has a higher volatility of 5.10% compared to Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF GBP Hedged Dist (TIGB.L) at 0.45%. This indicates that SGLP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TIGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SGLP.L	TIGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.10%	0.45%	+4.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.90%	0.71%	+19.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.02%	0.97%	+22.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.11%	0.74%	+15.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.72%	0.74%	+14.98%

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

SGLP.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is higher than TIGB.L's 0.10% 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

SGLP.L vs. TIGB.L - Dividend Comparison

SGLP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TIGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.92%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TIGB.L Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF GBP Hedged Dist	3.92%	4.11%	4.93%	4.53%	1.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SGLP.L and TIGB.L in my portfolio?

SGLP.L and TIGB.L have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SGLP.L or TIGB.L?

On fees, TIGB.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SGLP.L or TIGB.L?

TIGB.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.12% for SGLP.L.

What is the main difference between SGLP.L and TIGB.L?

SGLP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while TIGB.L is Short-Term Bond. SGLP.L tracks Gold, while TIGB.L tracks Bloomberg US Treasury Coupons Index. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for SGLP.L and 0.10% for TIGB.L.