1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

1816.HK (CGN Power) is a stock, while GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) is Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. Over the past 10 years, 1816.HK returned 7.48%/yr vs 13.80%/yr for GLCC.TO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a HK$10,000 investment in CGN Power (1816.HK) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

1816.HK is traded in HKD, while GLCC.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the GLCC.TO values have been converted to HKD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 1816.HK achieves a 10.85% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's -1.02% return. Over the past 10 years, 1816.HK has underperformed GLCC.TO with an annualized return of 7.48%, while GLCC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 13.80% annualized return.

1816.HK

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: -9.28%
• YTD: 10.85%
• 6M: 5.45%
• 1Y: 27.36%
• 3Y*: 22.14%
• 5Y*: 17.55%
• 10Y*: 7.48%

GLCC.TO

• 1D: -3.17%
• 1M: -0.38%
• YTD: -1.02%
• 6M: 6.06%
• 1Y: 57.97%
• 3Y*: 39.37%
• 5Y*: 18.19%
• 10Y*: 13.80%

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

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
1816.HK CGN Power	10.85%	7.04%	44.53%	15.25%	-17.57%	49.92%	-15.94%	16.35%	-8.90%	2.08%
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	-1.02%	149.29%	10.12%	8.59%	-8.21%	-8.21%	16.77%	44.88%	-7.92%	15.62%

Correlation

The correlation between 1816.HK and GLCC.TO is -0.05, 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	-0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.05
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.05
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2014	0.01

The correlation between 1816.HK and GLCC.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.05 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

1816.HK

1816.HK Risk / Return Rank: 70
1816.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
1816.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
1816.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 65
1816.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
1816.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 72

GLCC.TO

GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 39
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 40
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
GLCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CGN Power (1816.HK) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). 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.

	1816.HK	GLCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	1.35	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.74	1.77	-0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.25	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.68	2.00	-0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.34	5.36	-1.02
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 1816.HK Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is comparable to the GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 1816.HK and GLCC.TO, 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

	1816.HK	GLCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.08	1.35	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60	0.53	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.29	0.41	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.11	0.00	+0.11

Drawdowns

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 1816.HK drawdown since its inception was -68.29%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -78.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 1816.HK and GLCC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	1816.HK	GLCC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.29%	-78.61%	+10.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.74%	-29.18%	+12.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.46%	-29.18%	-6.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.46%	-42.35%	+6.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.46%	-45.72%	+10.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.16%	-24.70%	+11.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-46.90%	-45.69%	-1.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.41%	10.84%	-4.43%

Volatility

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CGN Power (1816.HK) is 7.14%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 15.30%. This indicates that 1816.HK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	1816.HK	GLCC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.14%	15.30%	-8.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.44%	35.39%	-15.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.96%	43.03%	-17.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.17%	34.44%	-4.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.77%	34.07%	-7.30%

Dividends

1816.HK vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

1816.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, less than GLCC.TO's 8.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
1816.HK CGN Power	3.13%	3.52%	3.62%	4.74%	5.31%	4.08%	4.97%	4.05%	4.48%	2.73%	2.34%	0.11%
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	8.69%	6.01%	10.30%	11.16%	10.08%	6.31%	6.47%	4.58%	5.62%	7.09%	9.21%	11.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 1816.HK and GLCC.TO in my portfolio?

1816.HK and GLCC.TO have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.