CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and HGGG.TO (Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while HGGG.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Global Gold Giants Index TR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CGL-C.TO returned 21.30%/yr vs 25.53%/yr for HGGG.TO. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for HGGG.TO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 4.39% return, which is significantly higher than HGGG.TO's 0.08% 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%
HGGG.TO
- 1D
- -2.10%
- 1M
- 2.94%
- YTD
- 0.08%
- 6M
- 7.32%
- 1Y
- 75.09%
- 3Y*
- 48.72%
- 5Y*
- 25.53%
- 10Y*
- —
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 4.39% | 55.55% | 37.41% | 10.13% | 6.11% | -4.85% | 21.75% | 14.53% |
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF | 0.08% | 170.60% | 26.04% | 4.17% | -4.68% | -14.34% | 31.47% | 25.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and HGGG.TO is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2019 | 0.49 |
Over the past year, CGL-C.TO and HGGG.TO have become more correlated (0.69) than their long-term average of 0.48, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
HGGG.TO
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.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.TO | HGGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.29 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.94 | 2.36 | -0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.77 | 6.11 | -1.34 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CGL-C.TO | HGGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33 | 1.69 | -0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.26 | 0.79 | +0.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | 0.73 | -0.13 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, smaller than the maximum HGGG.TO drawdown of -51.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and HGGG.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | HGGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -51.54% | +18.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -31.16% | +13.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -31.16% | +13.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -39.14% | +21.59% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.34% | -24.96% | +9.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -20.17% | +7.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.06% | 12.00% | -4.94% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) is 5.33%, while Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.TO) has a volatility of 13.86%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HGGG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL-C.TO | HGGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.33% | 13.86% | -8.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.56% | 34.80% | -13.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.35% | 43.96% | -18.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.98% | 32.54% | -15.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 32.64% | -17.08% |
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than HGGG.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL-C.TO nor HGGG.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.54% | 2.65% | 0.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and HGGG.TO have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HGGG.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HGGG.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while HGGG.TO is Gold. CGL-C.TO tracks Gold, while HGGG.TO tracks Solactive Global Gold Giants Index TR. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.40% for HGGG.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and HGGG.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