SGLP.L vs. UC15.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) and UC15.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both exchange-traded funds - SGLP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while UC15.L is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS CMCI. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SGLP.L returned 14.26%/yr vs 9.68%/yr for UC15.L. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SGLP.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for UC15.L.

Performance

SGLP.L vs. UC15.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.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 lower than UC15.L's 21.49% return. Over the past 10 years, SGLP.L has outperformed UC15.L with an annualized return of 14.26%, while UC15.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.68% annualized return.

SGLP.L

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: -3.54%
• YTD: 3.97%
• 6M: 5.23%
• 1Y: 34.67%
• 3Y*: 28.15%
• 5Y*: 19.87%
• 10Y*: 14.26%

UC15.L

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: 0.83%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 20.94%
• 1Y: 31.35%
• 3Y*: 10.32%
• 5Y*: 12.77%
• 10Y*: 9.68%

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

SGLP.L vs. UC15.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A	3.97%	53.60%	28.14%	7.26%	11.83%	-2.88%	19.99%	14.65%	4.31%	1.64%
UC15.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	21.49%	2.57%	6.44%	-6.52%	29.97%	36.11%	-2.49%	5.31%	-5.25%	-2.80%

Correlation

The correlation between SGLP.L and UC15.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	0.22
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2013	0.27

The correlation between SGLP.L and UC15.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.07 (1 year) to 0.27 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

SGLP.L vs. UC15.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

UC15.L

UC15.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
UC15.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
UC15.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
UC15.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
UC15.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
UC15.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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. UC15.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.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	UC15.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	2.12	-0.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.90	2.77	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.39	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.88	5.23	-3.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.06	13.93	-8.86
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. UC15.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the UC15.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGLP.L and UC15.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	UC15.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	2.12	-0.66
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.23	0.87	+0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.91	0.66	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.53	0.33	+0.20

Drawdowns

SGLP.L vs. UC15.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGLP.L drawdown since its inception was -38.83%, smaller than the maximum UC15.L drawdown of -42.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLP.L and UC15.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	SGLP.L	UC15.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.83%	-42.93%	+4.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.89%	-6.18%	-11.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.89%	-13.98%	-3.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.89%	-17.43%	-0.46%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.34%	-30.26%	+7.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.97%	-3.53%	-12.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.37%	-15.17%	+1.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.65%	2.32%	+4.33%

Volatility

SGLP.L vs. UC15.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.L) have volatilities of 5.10% and 5.07%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SGLP.L	UC15.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.10%	5.07%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.90%	12.34%	+7.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.02%	15.26%	+7.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.11%	14.69%	+1.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.72%	14.80%	+0.92%

SGLP.L vs. UC15.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SGLP.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than UC15.L's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

SGLP.L vs. UC15.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither SGLP.L nor UC15.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SGLP.L and UC15.L in my portfolio?

SGLP.L and UC15.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 UC15.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, SGLP.L or UC15.L?

SGLP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for UC15.L.

What is the main difference between SGLP.L and UC15.L?

SGLP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while UC15.L is Commodities. SGLP.L tracks Gold, while UC15.L tracks UBS CMCI. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for SGLP.L and 0.34% for UC15.L.