TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

TSGB.L (VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A) and GDGB.L (VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TSGB.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while GDGB.L is a Gold fund tracking the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TSGB.L returned 12.11%/yr vs 20.20%/yr for GDGB.L. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TSGB.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for GDGB.L.

Performance

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A (TSGB.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TSGB.L achieves a 12.75% return, which is significantly higher than GDGB.L's 0.91% return.

TSGB.L

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 4.90%
• YTD: 12.75%
• 6M: 13.89%
• 1Y: 28.93%
• 3Y*: 17.68%
• 5Y*: 12.11%
• 10Y*: —

GDGB.L

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -4.88%
• YTD: 0.91%
• 6M: 6.31%
• 1Y: 65.52%
• 3Y*: 37.68%
• 5Y*: 20.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TSGB.L VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A	12.75%	19.46%	12.13%	14.14%	-7.29%	19.61%	9.42%	11.77%
GDGB.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF	0.91%	138.26%	11.24%	3.69%	3.04%	-10.47%	19.56%	42.16%

Correlation

The correlation between TSGB.L and GDGB.L is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2019	0.18

The correlation between TSGB.L and GDGB.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (all time) to 0.31 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TSGB.L	GDGB.L
Financial Services	29.4%	-
Technology	23.6%	-
Healthcare	12.7%	-
Industrials	11.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	7.4%	-
Communication Services	7.0%	-
Basic Materials	2.7%	100.0%
Real Estate	2.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	-
Utilities	1.1%	-
Energy	0.4%	-

Return for Risk

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

TSGB.L

TSGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
TSGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
TSGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
TSGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
TSGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
TSGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 70

GDGB.L

GDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 42
GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
GDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
GDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 41
GDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A (TSGB.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.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.

	TSGB.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	1.55	+0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.49	2.01	+1.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.26	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	2.23	+1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.99	5.70	+7.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TSGB.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is higher than the GDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TSGB.L and GDGB.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

	TSGB.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.44	1.55	+0.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	0.62	+0.32
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.82	0.51	+0.31

Drawdowns

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TSGB.L drawdown since its inception was -26.20%, smaller than the maximum GDGB.L drawdown of -40.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TSGB.L and GDGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	TSGB.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.20%	-40.80%	+14.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.80%	-28.97%	+20.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.64%	-28.97%	+12.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.64%	-35.49%	+18.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-24.72%	+24.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.41%	-17.52%	+14.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.26%	11.36%	-9.10%

Volatility

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A (TSGB.L) is 3.24%, while VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF (GDGB.L) has a volatility of 14.28%. This indicates that TSGB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TSGB.L	GDGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.24%	14.28%	-11.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.65%	33.43%	-23.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.04%	41.77%	-29.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.92%	32.58%	-19.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.93%	32.11%	-17.18%

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

TSGB.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than GDGB.L's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

TSGB.L vs. GDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

TSGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, while GDGB.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GDGB.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TSGB.L VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A	2.11%	2.23%	2.63%	2.56%	2.67%	1.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TSGB.L and GDGB.L in my portfolio?

TSGB.L and GDGB.L have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, TSGB.L or GDGB.L?

On fees, TSGB.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TSGB.L or GDGB.L?

TSGB.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for GDGB.L.

What is the main difference between TSGB.L and GDGB.L?

TSGB.L is categorized as Global Equities, while GDGB.L is Gold. TSGB.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while GDGB.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for TSGB.L and 0.53% for GDGB.L.