XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L
XLFQ.L (Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF) and SGLS.L (Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - XLFQ.L is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while SGLS.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold (GBP Hedged). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XLFQ.L returned 9.10%/yr vs 17.34%/yr for SGLS.L. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. XLFQ.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for SGLS.L.
Performance
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLFQ.L achieves a -4.71% return, which is significantly lower than SGLS.L's 3.01% return.
XLFQ.L
- 1D
- 3.26%
- 1M
- 2.31%
- YTD
- -4.71%
- 6M
- -2.62%
- 1Y
- 4.63%
- 3Y*
- 15.45%
- 5Y*
- 9.10%
- 10Y*
- 13.02%
SGLS.L
- 1D
- 0.62%
- 1M
- -2.49%
- YTD
- 3.01%
- 6M
- 5.20%
- 1Y
- 30.77%
- 3Y*
- 29.59%
- 5Y*
- 17.34%
- 10Y*
- —
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLFQ.L Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF | -4.71% | 7.07% | 32.15% | 6.12% | -0.39% | 37.90% | 15.87% |
SGLS.L Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC | 3.01% | 64.22% | 24.42% | 11.48% | -1.42% | -4.63% | -3.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLFQ.L and SGLS.L is -0.03, 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 | -0.03 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 29, 2020 | -0.10 |
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
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L — Risk / Return Rank
XLFQ.L
SGLS.L
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) and Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.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.
| XLFQ.L | SGLS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.24 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | 1.71 | -1.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 4.48 | -3.64 |
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
| XLFQ.L | SGLS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 | 1.24 | -0.91 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 1.07 | -0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.65 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.64 | 0.90 | -0.26 |
Drawdowns
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLFQ.L drawdown since its inception was -35.39%, which is greater than SGLS.L's maximum drawdown of -21.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLFQ.L and SGLS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLFQ.L | SGLS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.39% | -21.94% | -13.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.81% | -17.93% | +5.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.01% | -17.93% | -1.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.01% | -21.94% | +2.93% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.39% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.62% | -15.99% | +9.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.65% | -6.98% | +1.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.48% | 6.84% | -1.36% |
Volatility
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) is 4.46%, while Invesco Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (SGLS.L) has a volatility of 6.40%. This indicates that XLFQ.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLFQ.L | SGLS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.46% | 6.40% | -1.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.48% | 21.65% | -11.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.91% | 24.68% | -10.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.52% | 17.91% | -0.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.14% | 18.29% | +1.85% |
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLFQ.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than SGLS.L's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
XLFQ.L vs. SGLS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XLFQ.L nor SGLS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XLFQ.L and SGLS.L have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLFQ.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLFQ.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for SGLS.L.
XLFQ.L is categorized as Financials Equities, while SGLS.L is Precious Metals. XLFQ.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while SGLS.L tracks Gold (GBP Hedged). Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLFQ.L and 0.34% for SGLS.L.
Find the right allocation for XLFQ.L and SGLS.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