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

Performance

XGDU.L vs. XDWH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.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...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XGDU.L achieves a 3.77% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.L's -2.74% return.


XGDU.L

1D
0.58%
1M
-2.38%
YTD
3.77%
6M
5.98%
1Y
32.35%
3Y*
31.54%
5Y*
18.61%
10Y*

XDWH.L

1D
2.99%
1M
3.25%
YTD
-2.74%
6M
-1.64%
1Y
11.56%
3Y*
5.50%
5Y*
4.54%
10Y*
7.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
XGDU.L
Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities
3.77%64.71%26.20%13.45%0.32%-3.91%9.83%
XDWH.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
-2.74%15.25%0.75%3.81%-5.42%20.56%12.24%

Correlation

The correlation between XGDU.L and XDWH.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.22

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

0.18

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

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2020

0.17

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

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

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

XGDU.L
XGDU.L Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
XGDU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGDU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGDU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
XGDU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGDU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

XDWH.L
XDWH.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.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.


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

+0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.15

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.84

1.11

+0.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.73

2.80

+1.93

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

The current XGDU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is higher than the XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XGDU.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


XGDU.LXDWH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.30

0.79

+0.50

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.08

0.32

+0.76

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.00

0.57

+0.44

Drawdowns

XGDU.L vs. XDWH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XGDU.L drawdown since its inception was -21.59%, smaller than the maximum XDWH.L drawdown of -26.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGDU.L and XDWH.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XGDU.LXDWH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.59%

-26.24%

+4.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.47%

-10.39%

-7.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.47%

-19.28%

+1.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.00%

-19.28%

-1.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.24%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.82%

-5.82%

-10.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.31%

-4.98%

-2.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.82%

4.12%

+2.70%

Volatility

XGDU.L vs. XDWH.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.L) has a higher volatility of 6.39% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) at 4.80%. This indicates that XGDU.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


XGDU.LXDWH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.39%

4.80%

+1.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.85%

10.77%

+11.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.87%

14.57%

+10.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.32%

14.18%

+3.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.31%

14.97%

+2.34%

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

XGDU.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than XDWH.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XGDU.L vs. XDWH.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XGDU.L and XDWH.L have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XGDU.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XGDU.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWH.L.

XGDU.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while XDWH.L is Health & Biotech Equities. XGDU.L tracks Gold, while XDWH.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for XGDU.L and 0.25% for XDWH.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XGDU.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