SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L
SGLS.L (Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC) and AUCP.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) are both Gold funds - SGLS.L tracks the Gold (GBP Hedged) while AUCP.L tracks the STOXX Global Gold Miners. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SGLS.L returned 15.98%/yr vs 23.53%/yr for AUCP.L. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SGLS.L charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for AUCP.L.
Performance
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SGLS.L achieves a -7.61% return, which is significantly higher than AUCP.L's -11.46% return.
SGLS.L
- 1D
- -2.89%
- 1M
- -11.28%
- YTD
- -7.61%
- 6M
- -11.43%
- 1Y
- 19.53%
- 3Y*
- 26.26%
- 5Y*
- 15.98%
- 10Y*
- —
AUCP.L
- 1D
- -4.27%
- 1M
- -10.04%
- YTD
- -11.46%
- 6M
- -15.49%
- 1Y
- 53.40%
- 3Y*
- 44.88%
- 5Y*
- 23.53%
- 10Y*
- 13.83%
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SGLS.L Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC | -7.61% | 63.32% | 25.10% | 11.48% | -1.79% | -5.15% | 3.51% |
AUCP.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF | -11.46% | 161.99% | 20.20% | 8.69% | -4.04% | -8.91% | -12.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between SGLS.L and AUCP.L is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2020 | 0.76 |
The correlation between SGLS.L and AUCP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L — Risk / Return Rank
SGLS.L
AUCP.L
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| SGLS.L | AUCP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.20 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.79 | 1.49 | -0.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.33 | 3.96 | -1.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SGLS.L drawdown since its inception was -24.66%, smaller than the maximum AUCP.L drawdown of -81.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLS.L and AUCP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SGLS.L | AUCP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.66% | -81.66% | +57.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.66% | -35.61% | +10.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.66% | -35.61% | +10.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.66% | -39.38% | +14.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.66% | -33.80% | +9.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.80% | -45.85% | +37.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.38% | 13.44% | -5.06% |
Volatility
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.L) is 9.09%, while L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCP.L) has a volatility of 17.79%. This indicates that SGLS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AUCP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SGLS.L | AUCP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.09% | 17.79% | -8.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.00% | 37.30% | -14.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.93% | 46.74% | -20.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.45% | 39.28% | -21.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.42% | 36.09% | -18.67% |
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SGLS.L has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is lower than AUCP.L's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
SGLS.L vs. AUCP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SGLS.L nor AUCP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SGLS.L and AUCP.L have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SGLS.L is cheaper at 0.34% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SGLS.L is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCP.L.
SGLS.L tracks Gold (GBP Hedged), while AUCP.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for SGLS.L and 0.55% for AUCP.L.
Find the right allocation for SGLS.L and AUCP.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