PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers IE Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC Securities (XGDG.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XGDG.L achieves a 2.36% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.L's -5.22% return.


XGDG.L

1D
-1.44%
1M
-4.35%
YTD
2.36%
6M
4.37%
1Y
30.94%
3Y*
29.69%
5Y*
16.88%
10Y*

XDWH.L

1D
0.72%
1M
0.94%
YTD
-5.22%
6M
-5.79%
1Y
10.01%
3Y*
2.03%
5Y*
5.04%
10Y*
8.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
XGDG.L
Xtrackers IE Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC Securities
2.36%63.15%25.16%11.50%-1.40%-5.50%6.91%
XDWH.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
-5.22%7.04%2.51%-1.38%5.83%21.71%0.93%

Correlation

The correlation between XGDG.L and XDWH.L is 0.06, 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

0.06

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.01

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2020

-0.02

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

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XGDG.L
XGDG.L Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
XGDG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGDG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGDG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
XGDG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGDG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

XDWH.L
XDWH.L Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
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.

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers IE Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC Securities (XGDG.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.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.


XGDG.LXDWH.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.13

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.66

0.96

+0.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.46

2.50

+1.96

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XGDG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is higher than the XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XGDG.L and XDWH.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XGDG.LXDWH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.22

0.70

+0.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.97

0.36

+0.61

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.87

0.57

+0.30

Drawdowns

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XGDG.L drawdown since its inception was -23.31%, which is greater than XDWH.L's maximum drawdown of -18.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGDG.L and XDWH.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XGDG.LXDWH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.31%

-18.80%

-4.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.55%

-10.43%

-8.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.55%

-18.80%

+0.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.90%

-18.80%

-3.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.82%

-8.57%

-8.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.23%

-4.41%

-3.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.92%

3.99%

+2.93%

Volatility

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers IE Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC Securities (XGDG.L) has a higher volatility of 6.36% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) at 4.50%. This indicates that XGDG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDWH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XGDG.LXDWH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.36%

4.50%

+1.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.32%

10.58%

+11.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.25%

14.31%

+10.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.43%

13.96%

+3.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.30%

15.48%

+1.82%

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XGDG.L has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than XDWH.L's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

XGDG.L vs. XDWH.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XGDG.L nor XDWH.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XGDG.L and XDWH.L have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XDWH.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XDWH.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for XGDG.L.

XGDG.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while XDWH.L is Health & Biotech Equities. XGDG.L tracks Gold (GBP Hedged), while XDWH.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for XGDG.L and 0.25% for XDWH.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XGDG.L and XDWH.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