ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZINC.L (WisdomTree Zinc) and SPAP.L (Invesco Physical Palladium) are both exchange-traded funds - ZINC.L is a Metals fund tracking the Bloomberg Zinc, while SPAP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Palladium. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZINC.L returned 7.37%/yr vs 8.75%/yr for SPAP.L. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZINC.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for SPAP.L.

Performance

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree Zinc (ZINC.L) and Invesco Physical Palladium (SPAP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZINC.L achieves a 15.82% return, which is significantly higher than SPAP.L's -16.71% return. Over the past 10 years, ZINC.L has underperformed SPAP.L with an annualized return of 7.37%, while SPAP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 8.75% annualized return.

ZINC.L

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: 6.40%
• YTD: 15.82%
• 6M: 17.29%
• 1Y: 38.82%
• 3Y*: 17.84%
• 5Y*: 5.86%
• 10Y*: 7.37%

SPAP.L

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: -12.22%
• YTD: -16.71%
• 6M: -8.88%
• 1Y: 32.64%
• 3Y*: -2.32%
• 5Y*: -14.30%
• 10Y*: 8.75%

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

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ZINC.L WisdomTree Zinc	15.82%	6.70%	13.11%	-9.01%	-11.08%	26.65%	15.73%	-0.07%	-22.41%	27.77%
SPAP.L Invesco Physical Palladium	-16.71%	75.03%	-19.28%	-38.03%	-5.67%	-20.37%	23.23%	53.29%	17.53%	56.28%

Correlation

The correlation between ZINC.L and SPAP.L is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2014	0.29

Return for Risk

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZINC.L

ZINC.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
ZINC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
ZINC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
ZINC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
ZINC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
ZINC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 72

SPAP.L

SPAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 22
SPAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
SPAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
SPAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 24
SPAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
SPAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Zinc (ZINC.L) and Invesco Physical Palladium (SPAP.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.

	ZINC.L	SPAP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	0.72	+1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	1.20	+1.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.15	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	0.85	+2.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.28	1.84	+11.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZINC.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is higher than the SPAP.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZINC.L and SPAP.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

	ZINC.L	SPAP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	0.72	+1.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23	-0.33	+0.56
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.31	0.23	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.03	0.09	-0.13

Drawdowns

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZINC.L drawdown since its inception was -77.49%, which is greater than SPAP.L's maximum drawdown of -71.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZINC.L and SPAP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZINC.L	SPAP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-77.49%	-71.98%	-5.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.74%	-38.36%	+27.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.66%	-39.84%	+20.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.04%	-71.98%	+24.94%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-47.04%	-71.98%	+24.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.98%	-57.04%	+20.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.38%	-30.16%	-26.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	17.69%	-14.79%

Volatility

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree Zinc (ZINC.L) is 4.90%, while Invesco Physical Palladium (SPAP.L) has a volatility of 10.55%. This indicates that ZINC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZINC.L	SPAP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.90%	10.55%	-5.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.12%	37.90%	-23.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.26%	45.10%	-26.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.18%	43.18%	-18.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.98%	38.56%	-14.58%

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZINC.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than SPAP.L's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZINC.L vs. SPAP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ZINC.L nor SPAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZINC.L and SPAP.L in my portfolio?

ZINC.L and SPAP.L have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZINC.L or SPAP.L?

On fees, SPAP.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZINC.L or SPAP.L?

SPAP.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ZINC.L.

What is the main difference between ZINC.L and SPAP.L?

ZINC.L is categorized as Metals, while SPAP.L is Precious Metals. ZINC.L tracks Bloomberg Zinc, while SPAP.L tracks Palladium. They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ZINC.L and 0.19% for SPAP.L.