SPGP.L vs. RING
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF (SPGP.L) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING).
SPGP.L and RING are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. SPGP.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the EMIX Global Mining Global Gold TR USD. It was launched on Sep 16, 2011. RING is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. It was launched on Jan 31, 2012. Both SPGP.L and RING are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: SPGP.L or RING.
Key characteristics
| SPGP.L | RING | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 15.50% | 19.28% |
| 1Y Return | 25.72% | 35.08% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 3.09% | 2.10% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 6.83% | 7.78% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 10.19% | 7.78% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.84 | 1.07 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.32 | 1.57 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.16 | 1.19 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.52 | 0.63 |
| Martin Ratio | 3.28 | 4.45 |
| Ulcer Index | 7.07% | 7.76% |
| Daily Std Dev | 27.41% | 32.18% |
| Max Drawdown | -79.54% | -79.47% |
| Current Drawdown | -24.08% | -34.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between SPGP.L and RING is 0.69, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
SPGP.L vs. RING - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, SPGP.L achieves a 15.50% return, which is significantly lower than RING's 19.28% return. Over the past 10 years, SPGP.L has outperformed RING with an annualized return of 10.19%, while RING has yielded a comparatively lower 7.78% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
SPGP.L vs. RING - Expense Ratio Comparison
SPGP.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than RING's 0.39% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
SPGP.L vs. RING - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF (SPGP.L) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING). 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.
Dividends
SPGP.L vs. RING - Dividend Comparison
SPGP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SPGP.L iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | 1.61% | 2.01% | 2.29% | 2.38% | 0.82% | 0.83% | 0.70% | 0.42% | 1.42% | 0.97% | 0.85% | 1.48% |
Drawdowns
SPGP.L vs. RING - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SPGP.L drawdown since its inception was -79.54%, roughly equal to the maximum RING drawdown of -79.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPGP.L and RING. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
SPGP.L vs. RING - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Producers UCITS ETF (SPGP.L) is 8.63%, while iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) has a volatility of 10.75%. This indicates that SPGP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RING based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.