WAGA.PA vs. GC=F

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

WAGA.PA (Waga Energy SA) is a stock, while GC=F (Gold Futures) is an asset. Over the past 3 years, WAGA.PA returned -3.82%/yr vs 27.88%/yr for GC=F. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Waga Energy SA (WAGA.PA) and Gold Futures (GC=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

WAGA.PA is traded in EUR, while GC=F is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GC=F values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WAGA.PA achieves a -4.49% return, which is significantly lower than GC=F's 3.80% return.

WAGA.PA

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 0.86%
• YTD: -4.49%
• 6M: 5.17%
• 1Y: 40.46%
• 3Y*: -3.82%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GC=F

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -1.91%
• YTD: 3.80%
• 6M: 5.68%
• 1Y: 29.38%
• 3Y*: 27.88%
• 5Y*: 19.73%
• 10Y*: 13.31%

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

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
WAGA.PA Waga Energy SA	-4.49%	53.12%	-37.13%	-10.70%	0.71%	8.02%
GC=F Gold Futures	5.27%	45.00%	35.90%	9.94%	5.74%	3.75%

Correlation

The correlation between WAGA.PA and GC=F is -0.09, 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	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2021	0.00

Return for Risk

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

WAGA.PA

WAGA.PA Risk / Return Rank: 84
WAGA.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
WAGA.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
WAGA.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 93
WAGA.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
WAGA.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 80

GC=F

GC=F Risk / Return Rank: 54
GC=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
GC=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
GC=F Omega Ratio Rank: 54
GC=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
GC=F Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Waga Energy SA (WAGA.PA) and Gold Futures (GC=F). 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.

	WAGA.PA	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.00	1.11	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.19	1.50	+1.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.23	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.43	1.74	+1.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.68	4.25	+2.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WAGA.PA Sharpe Ratio is 1.00, which is comparable to the GC=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WAGA.PA and GC=F, 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

	WAGA.PA	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.00	1.11	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.13	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.84	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	0.63	-0.69

Drawdowns

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WAGA.PA drawdown since its inception was -77.39%, which is greater than GC=F's maximum drawdown of -36.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WAGA.PA and GC=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	WAGA.PA	GC=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-77.39%	-36.91%	-40.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.63%	-16.35%	+4.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-71.13%	-16.35%	-54.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.35%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-18.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.90%	-15.60%	-23.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-36.94%	-11.40%	-25.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.44%	6.75%	-2.31%

Volatility

WAGA.PA vs. GC=F - Volatility Comparison

Waga Energy SA (WAGA.PA) has a higher volatility of 4.47% compared to Gold Futures (GC=F) at 3.98%. This indicates that WAGA.PA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GC=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WAGA.PA	GC=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.47%	3.98%	+0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.13%	22.32%	-5.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.97%	25.63%	+14.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.25%	17.40%	+29.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.25%	15.86%	+31.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WAGA.PA and GC=F in my portfolio?

WAGA.PA and GC=F have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.