PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF (SPGP.L) and Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

SPGP.L is traded in GBp, while CSH.PA is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the CSH.PA values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPGP.L achieves a -5.80% return, which is significantly lower than CSH.PA's -0.01% return. Over the past 10 years, SPGP.L has outperformed CSH.PA with an annualized return of 13.80%, while CSH.PA has yielded a comparatively lower 1.90% annualized return.


SPGP.L

1D
5.49%
1M
-16.05%
YTD
-5.80%
6M
-4.88%
1Y
52.23%
3Y*
36.39%
5Y*
18.46%
10Y*
13.80%

CSH.PA

1D
0.09%
1M
-0.00%
YTD
-0.01%
6M
-0.55%
1Y
3.63%
3Y*
3.09%
5Y*
2.02%
10Y*
1.90%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SPGP.L
iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF
-5.80%137.41%12.81%3.72%-0.45%-9.15%19.43%41.00%-4.37%-2.80%
CSH.PA
Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc
-0.01%7.72%-1.02%1.16%5.11%-6.54%7.70%-6.25%0.43%3.80%

Correlation

The correlation between SPGP.L and CSH.PA is 0.01, 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

0.01

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

-0.01

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

-0.03

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2011

0.11

The correlation between SPGP.L and CSH.PA shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (5 years) to 0.11 (all time), 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

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPGP.L
SPGP.L Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
SPGP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPGP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPGP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
SPGP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPGP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

CSH.PA
CSH.PA Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
CSH.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF (SPGP.L) and Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA). 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.


SPGP.LCSH.PADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.21

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.54

2.37

-0.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.40

5.18

-0.78

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPGP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.26, which is comparable to the CSH.PA Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPGP.L and CSH.PA, 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...

Drawdowns

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPGP.L drawdown since its inception was -86.56%, which is greater than CSH.PA's maximum drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPGP.L and CSH.PA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SPGP.LCSH.PADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.56%

-27.56%

-59.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-33.69%

-1.96%

-31.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.69%

-3.28%

-30.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.81%

-4.89%

-29.92%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.71%

-11.66%

-32.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-29.46%

-1.30%

-28.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-60.25%

-10.49%

-49.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.81%

0.90%

+10.91%

Volatility

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF (SPGP.L) has a higher volatility of 13.22% compared to Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA) at 1.04%. This indicates that SPGP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSH.PA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SPGP.LCSH.PADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.22%

1.04%

+12.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

33.40%

2.65%

+30.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

41.37%

4.01%

+37.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

34.91%

5.37%

+29.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.95%

7.11%

+26.84%

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPGP.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than CSH.PA's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

SPGP.L vs. CSH.PA - Dividend Comparison

Neither SPGP.L nor CSH.PA has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CSH.PA
Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.05%0.05%2.60%
SPGP.L
iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


SPGP.L and CSH.PA have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

CSH.PA is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for SPGP.L.

SPGP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while CSH.PA is Money Market. SPGP.L tracks EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD, while CSH.PA tracks Solactive Euro Overnight Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for SPGP.L and 0.10% for CSH.PA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SPGP.L and CSH.PA

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