PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZINC.L vs. SPLT.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZINC.L vs. SPLT.L - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ZINC.L is traded in USD, while SPLT.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SPLT.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 SPLT.L's -5.51% return. Over the past 10 years, ZINC.L has outperformed SPLT.L with an annualized return of 7.37%, while SPLT.L has yielded a comparatively lower 6.37% 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%

SPLT.L

1D
0.25%
1M
-3.70%
YTD
-5.51%
6M
15.01%
1Y
72.68%
3Y*
21.87%
5Y*
9.91%
10Y*
6.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZINC.L
WisdomTree Zinc
15.82%6.70%13.11%-9.01%-11.08%26.65%15.73%-0.07%-22.41%27.77%
SPLT.L
iShares Physical Platinum ETC
-5.51%120.07%-9.90%-6.07%10.71%-10.99%10.32%22.42%-15.00%1.98%

Correlation

The correlation between ZINC.L and SPLT.L is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.31

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

0.33

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

0.35

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011

0.29

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

ZINC.L vs. SPLT.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: 6666
Overall Rank
ZINC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZINC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZINC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
ZINC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZINC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

SPLT.L
SPLT.L Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
SPLT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPLT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPLT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
SPLT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPLT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Zinc (ZINC.L) and iShares Physical Platinum ETC (SPLT.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.LSPLT.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.27

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

2.03

+1.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.28

4.22

+9.06

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

The current ZINC.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is higher than the SPLT.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZINC.L and SPLT.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


ZINC.LSPLT.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.12

1.49

+0.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.23

0.31

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.31

0.22

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.03

0.00

-0.03

Drawdowns

ZINC.L vs. SPLT.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZINC.L drawdown since its inception was -77.49%, which is greater than SPLT.L's maximum drawdown of -70.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZINC.L and SPLT.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZINC.LSPLT.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.49%

-70.11%

-7.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.74%

-35.57%

+24.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.66%

-35.57%

+15.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.04%

-35.57%

-11.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.04%

-51.44%

+4.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-36.98%

-33.68%

-3.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-56.38%

-42.93%

-13.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.90%

17.16%

-14.26%

Volatility

ZINC.L vs. SPLT.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree Zinc (ZINC.L) is 4.90%, while iShares Physical Platinum ETC (SPLT.L) has a volatility of 11.80%. This indicates that ZINC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPLT.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZINC.LSPLT.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.90%

11.80%

-6.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.12%

42.93%

-28.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.26%

48.46%

-30.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.18%

32.41%

-7.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.98%

29.28%

-5.30%

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

ZINC.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than SPLT.L's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZINC.L vs. SPLT.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ZINC.L and SPLT.L have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SPLT.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SPLT.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ZINC.L.

ZINC.L is categorized as Metals, while SPLT.L is Precious Metals. ZINC.L tracks Bloomberg Zinc, while SPLT.L tracks Platinum. They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ZINC.L and 0.20% for SPLT.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZINC.L and SPLT.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