UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L
UBTS.L (UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) and SGLN.L (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - UBTS.L is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD, while SGLN.L is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UBTS.L returned 3.32%/yr vs 20.12%/yr for SGLN.L. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UBTS.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLN.L.
Performance
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UBTS.L achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly lower than SGLN.L's 3.89% return.
UBTS.L
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 0.69%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 0.83%
- 1Y
- 5.77%
- 3Y*
- 2.02%
- 5Y*
- 3.32%
- 10Y*
- —
SGLN.L
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- -1.36%
- YTD
- 3.89%
- 6M
- 5.42%
- 1Y
- 33.75%
- 3Y*
- 28.17%
- 5Y*
- 20.12%
- 10Y*
- 14.27%
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UBTS.L UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | 1.80% | -0.11% | 4.95% | -1.59% | 3.39% | 6.97% | 4.62% | 3.52% | 5.25% | -7.29% |
SGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 3.89% | 53.66% | 28.20% | 7.24% | 11.84% | -2.57% | 19.62% | 14.63% | 4.36% | 1.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between UBTS.L and SGLN.L is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 28, 2016 | 0.33 |
The correlation between UBTS.L and SGLN.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.33 (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
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L — Risk / Return Rank
UBTS.L
SGLN.L
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UBTS.L) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.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.
| UBTS.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.29 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.15 | 1.91 | -0.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.08 | 5.05 | -1.97 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| UBTS.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 | 1.45 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 | 1.23 | -0.83 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.90 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | 0.55 | -0.28 |
Drawdowns
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UBTS.L drawdown since its inception was -15.99%, smaller than the maximum SGLN.L drawdown of -41.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UBTS.L and SGLN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UBTS.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.99% | -41.71% | +25.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.97% | -17.57% | +12.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.52% | -17.57% | +10.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.99% | -17.57% | +1.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -21.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.74% | -16.01% | +10.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.89% | -14.76% | +7.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.87% | 6.67% | -4.80% |
Volatility
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UBTS.L) is 1.78%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (SGLN.L) has a volatility of 5.08%. This indicates that UBTS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UBTS.L | SGLN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.78% | 5.08% | -3.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.63% | 20.08% | -15.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.29% | 23.19% | -16.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.15% | 16.30% | -8.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.68% | 15.78% | -7.10% |
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
UBTS.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLN.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
UBTS.L vs. SGLN.L - Dividend Comparison
UBTS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.01%, while SGLN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SGLN.L iShares Physical Gold ETC | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
UBTS.L UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | 4.01% | 3.26% | 4.42% | 4.57% | 6.66% | 2.83% | 0.84% | 2.30% | 2.38% | 1.27% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UBTS.L and SGLN.L have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SGLN.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SGLN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for UBTS.L.
UBTS.L is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while SGLN.L is Gold. UBTS.L tracks Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD, while SGLN.L tracks LBMA Gold Price. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for UBTS.L and 0.12% for SGLN.L.
Find the right allocation for UBTS.L and SGLN.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