PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and CMR.TO (iShares Premium Money Market ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while CMR.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by iShares. CGL-C.TO is passively managed, while CMR.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO returned 13.74%/yr vs 1.89%/yr for CMR.TO. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for CMR.TO.

Performance

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.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 iShares Premium Money Market ETF (CMR.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 4.39% return, which is significantly higher than CMR.TO's 0.97% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has outperformed CMR.TO with an annualized return of 13.74%, while CMR.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 1.89% annualized return.

CGL-C.TO

1D
-0.29%
1M
0.43%
YTD
4.39%
6M
5.02%
1Y
33.57%
3Y*
32.37%
5Y*
21.30%
10Y*
13.74%

CMR.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.19%
YTD
0.97%
6M
1.05%
1Y
2.37%
3Y*
3.73%
5Y*
2.94%
10Y*
1.89%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF		4.39%55.55%37.41%10.13%6.11%-4.85%21.75%11.98%6.86%4.31%
CMR.TO
iShares Premium Money Market ETF		0.97%2.68%4.70%4.70%1.71%0.00%0.47%1.63%1.29%0.63%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL-C.TO and CMR.TO is -0.02, 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

-0.02

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

-0.08

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

-0.02

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

-0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2011

-0.02

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

iShares Premium Money Market ETF

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 CMR.TO:
CMR.TO vs. ZMMK.TOCMR.TO vs. CASH.TOCMR.TO vs. CBIL.TOCMR.TO vs. XFR.TOCMR.TO vs. MNY.TOCMR.TO vs. HSAV.TOCMR.TO vs. VOO

Return for Risk

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.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: 3535
Overall Rank
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
CMR.TO
CMR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
CMR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
CMR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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. CMR.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and iShares Premium Money Market ETF (CMR.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.

CGL-C.TOCMR.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.33
10.61

-9.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.75
21.13

-19.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

9.57

-8.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.94

25.44

-23.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.77

187.33

-182.56

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is lower than the CMR.TO Sharpe Ratio of 10.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL-C.TO and CMR.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CGL-C.TOCMR.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.33

10.61

-9.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.26

10.67

-9.41

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.89

7.02

-6.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

3.84

-3.24

Drawdowns

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, which is greater than CMR.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and CMR.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGL-C.TOCMR.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.04%

-0.52%

-32.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.37%

-0.09%

-17.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.37%

-0.09%

-17.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.55%

-0.09%

-17.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.78%

-0.14%

-22.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.34%

-0.02%

-15.32%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.24%

-0.01%

-12.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.06%

0.01%

+7.05%

Volatility

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.33% compared to iShares Premium Money Market ETF (CMR.TO) at 0.05%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMR.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CGL-C.TOCMR.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.33%

0.05%

+5.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.56%

0.18%

+21.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.35%

0.22%

+25.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.98%

0.28%

+16.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.56%

0.27%

+15.29%

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than CMR.TO's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGL-C.TO vs. CMR.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.48%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
CMR.TO
iShares Premium Money Market ETF		2.48%2.81%4.56%4.64%1.62%0.00%0.47%1.60%1.33%0.61%0.43%0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGL-C.TO and CMR.TO have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CMR.TO is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CMR.TO is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.

CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while CMR.TO is Money Market. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.14% for CMR.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and CMR.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