PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
TRIP.L
HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF
-8.11%10.16%28.46%23.58%-9.55%-36.44%
RMAU.L
The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities
10.45%52.84%28.16%7.63%11.68%0.32%
Different Trading Currencies

TRIP.L is traded in GBp, while RMAU.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RMAU.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TRIP.L achieves a -8.11% return, which is significantly lower than RMAU.L's 12.56% return.


TRIP.L

1D
-1.14%
1M
-2.11%
YTD
-8.11%
6M
1.34%
1Y
17.55%
3Y*
13.60%
5Y*
10Y*

RMAU.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-5.91%
YTD
12.56%
6M
25.99%
1Y
49.40%
3Y*
30.67%
5Y*
23.45%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

TRIP.L has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than RMAU.L's 0.22% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

TRIP.L
TRIP.L Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
TRIP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

RMAU.L
RMAU.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
RMAU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) and The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.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.


TRIP.LRMAU.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.36

1.98

-1.62

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.94

2.42

-1.48

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.38

-0.20

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.90

2.81

-1.92

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

1.64

11.58

-9.94

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TRIP.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the RMAU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TRIP.L and RMAU.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TRIP.LRMAU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.36

1.98

-1.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.04

0.90

-0.94

Correlation

The correlation between TRIP.L and RMAU.L is -0.07. This indicates that the assets' prices tend to move in opposite directions. Negative correlation can be particularly beneficial for diversification and risk management, as one asset may offset the losses of the other during market fluctuations.


Dividends

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither TRIP.L nor RMAU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TRIP.L drawdown since its inception was -48.20%, which is greater than RMAU.L's maximum drawdown of -23.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRIP.L and RMAU.L.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


TRIP.LRMAU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.20%

-21.56%

-26.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.65%

-18.15%

-10.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-26.58%

-12.13%

-14.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.65%

-6.93%

-22.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

15.65%

4.64%

+11.01%

Volatility

TRIP.L vs. RMAU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) is 7.58%, while The Royal Mint Physical Gold ETC Securities (RMAU.L) has a volatility of 12.75%. This indicates that TRIP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RMAU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


TRIP.LRMAU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.58%

12.75%

-5.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

44.13%

21.98%

+22.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

48.59%

24.84%

+23.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.92%

16.83%

+23.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

39.92%

20.75%

+19.17%