PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price (CAD), while CAR-UN.TO (Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO returned 13.01%/yr vs 4.34%/yr for CAR-UN.TO. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust (CAR-UN.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 1.94% return, which is significantly higher than CAR-UN.TO's -2.25% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has outperformed CAR-UN.TO with an annualized return of 13.01%, while CAR-UN.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 4.34% annualized return.

CGL-C.TO

1D
2.56%
1M
-3.33%
YTD
1.94%
6M
1.69%
1Y
28.64%
3Y*
31.98%
5Y*
21.21%
10Y*
13.01%

CAR-UN.TO

1D
-1.03%
1M
6.53%
YTD
-2.25%
6M
-2.28%
1Y
-19.38%
3Y*
-7.85%
5Y*
-6.74%
10Y*
4.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF		1.94%55.55%37.41%10.13%6.11%-4.85%21.75%11.98%6.86%4.31%
CAR-UN.TO
Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust		-2.25%-12.32%-9.85%17.89%-26.56%22.96%-2.97%22.93%22.52%23.53%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL-C.TO and CAR-UN.TO is 0.07, 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

0.07

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

0.09

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

0.05

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

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2012

0.04

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Gold Bullion ETF

Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust

Often compared with CGL-C.TO:
CGL-C.TO vs. CGL.TOCGL-C.TO vs. MNT.TOCGL-C.TO vs. GLDCGL-C.TO vs. PHYS.TOCGL-C.TO vs. ZGLD.TOCGL-C.TO vs. ABX.TOCGL-C.TO vs. XMD.TO
Often compared with CAR-UN.TO:
CAR-UN.TO vs. KMP-UN.TOCAR-UN.TO vs. SRU-UN.TOCAR-UN.TO vs. BEI-UN.TOCAR-UN.TO vs. AP-UN.TOCAR-UN.TO vs. GWO.TOCAR-UN.TO vs. ^GSPCCAR-UN.TO vs. VFV.TO

Return for Risk

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CGL-C.TO
CGL-C.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank
CAR-UN.TO
CAR-UN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
CAR-UN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAR-UN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAR-UN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
CAR-UN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAR-UN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
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.

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust (CAR-UN.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

CGL-C.TOCAR-UN.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.10
-1.09

+2.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.50
-1.46

+2.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

0.84

+0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.30

-0.72

+2.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.69

-1.20

+4.89

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is higher than the CAR-UN.TO Sharpe Ratio of -1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL-C.TO and CAR-UN.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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.01%, smaller than the maximum CAR-UN.TO drawdown of -41.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and CAR-UN.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGL-C.TOCAR-UN.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.01%

-41.12%

+11.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.11%

-26.88%

+4.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.11%

-38.75%

+16.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.11%

-39.29%

+17.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.78%

-39.29%

+16.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.33%

-35.33%

+18.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.72%

-12.05%

+1.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.79%

16.24%

-8.45%

Volatility

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 8.08% compared to Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust (CAR-UN.TO) at 6.14%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAR-UN.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CGL-C.TOCAR-UN.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.08%

6.14%

+1.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.58%

13.49%

+9.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.24%

17.94%

+8.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.24%

21.14%

-3.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.67%

21.05%

-5.38%

Dividends

CGL-C.TO vs. CAR-UN.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CAR-UN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CAR-UN.TO
Canadian Apartment Properties Real Estate Investment Trust		4.43%4.29%3.45%2.97%3.40%2.35%2.76%2.59%2.96%3.42%3.94%4.50%
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGL-C.TO and CAR-UN.TO have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and CAR-UN.TO

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