XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XLBP.L (Invesco US Materials Sector UCITS ETF) and SGLP.L (Invesco Physical Gold A) are both exchange-traded funds - XLBP.L is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while SGLP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLBP.L returned 10.67%/yr vs 14.26%/yr for SGLP.L. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XLBP.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SGLP.L.

Performance

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco US Materials Sector UCITS ETF (XLBP.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLBP.L achieves a 12.87% return, which is significantly higher than SGLP.L's 3.97% return. Over the past 10 years, XLBP.L has underperformed SGLP.L with an annualized return of 10.67%, while SGLP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 14.26% annualized return.

XLBP.L

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -0.03%
• YTD: 12.87%
• 6M: 15.50%
• 1Y: 20.26%
• 3Y*: 8.27%
• 5Y*: 6.07%
• 10Y*: 10.67%

SGLP.L

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: -3.54%
• YTD: 3.97%
• 6M: 5.23%
• 1Y: 34.67%
• 3Y*: 28.15%
• 5Y*: 19.87%
• 10Y*: 14.26%

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

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XLBP.L Invesco US Materials Sector UCITS ETF	12.87%	3.47%	0.77%	6.09%	-1.67%	28.80%	15.99%	19.70%	-9.97%	12.17%
SGLP.L Invesco Physical Gold A	3.97%	53.60%	28.14%	7.26%	11.83%	-2.88%	19.99%	14.65%	4.31%	1.64%

Correlation

The correlation between XLBP.L and SGLP.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.23
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.13
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2014	0.11

Over the past year, XLBP.L and SGLP.L have become more correlated (0.35) than their long-term average of 0.11, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLBP.L

XLBP.L Risk / Return Rank: 38
XLBP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
XLBP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
XLBP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 36
XLBP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
XLBP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 40

SGLP.L

SGLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 40
SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
SGLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
SGLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 47
SGLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
SGLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Materials Sector UCITS ETF (XLBP.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.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.

	XLBP.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.35	1.46	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	1.90	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.29	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.86	1.88	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.29	5.06	+1.23
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLBP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is comparable to the SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLBP.L and SGLP.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

	XLBP.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.35	1.46	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	1.23	-0.86
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.91	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.53	+0.03

Drawdowns

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLBP.L drawdown since its inception was -28.58%, smaller than the maximum SGLP.L drawdown of -38.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLBP.L and SGLP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLBP.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.58%	-38.83%	+10.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.74%	-17.89%	+7.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.98%	-17.89%	-4.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.98%	-17.89%	-4.09%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.58%	-22.34%	-6.24%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.23%	-15.97%	+12.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.53%	-13.37%	+7.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.18%	6.65%	-3.47%

Volatility

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco US Materials Sector UCITS ETF (XLBP.L) and Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) have volatilities of 5.17% and 5.10%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XLBP.L	SGLP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.17%	5.10%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.95%	19.90%	-7.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.85%	23.02%	-8.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.38%	16.11%	+0.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.20%	15.72%	+2.48%

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLBP.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLP.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

XLBP.L vs. SGLP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XLBP.L nor SGLP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLBP.L and SGLP.L in my portfolio?

XLBP.L and SGLP.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XLBP.L or SGLP.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, XLBP.L or SGLP.L?

SGLP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for XLBP.L.

What is the main difference between XLBP.L and SGLP.L?

XLBP.L is categorized as Industrials Equities, while SGLP.L is Precious Metals. XLBP.L tracks MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while SGLP.L tracks Gold. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLBP.L and 0.12% for SGLP.L.