CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and RGPM.NEO (RBC Global Precious Metals Fund) are both Precious Metals funds. CGL-C.TO is passively managed, while RGPM.NEO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGL-C.TO returned 32.37%/yr vs 45.22%/yr for RGPM.NEO. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 1.02%/yr for RGPM.NEO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - 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 RGPM.NEO's 1.34% 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%
RGPM.NEO
- 1D
- -2.71%
- 1M
- 0.98%
- YTD
- 1.34%
- 6M
- 8.72%
- 1Y
- 60.56%
- 3Y*
- 45.22%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 4.39% | 55.55% | 37.41% | 7.88% |
RGPM.NEO RBC Global Precious Metals Fund | 1.34% | 143.89% | 36.75% | -3.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and RGPM.NEO is 0.74, 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 | 0.74 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023 | 0.49 |
Over the past year, CGL-C.TO and RGPM.NEO have become more correlated (0.74) than their long-term average of 0.49, 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. RGPM.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
RGPM.NEO
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO). 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 | RGPM.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.27 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.94 | 2.07 | -0.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.77 | 5.61 | -0.85 |
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 | RGPM.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33 | 1.42 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.26 | — | — |
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 | 1.34 | -0.74 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, which is greater than RGPM.NEO's maximum drawdown of -29.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and RGPM.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | RGPM.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -29.46% | -3.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -29.46% | +12.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -29.46% | +12.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.34% | -23.85% | +8.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -8.38% | -3.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.06% | 10.82% | -3.76% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) is 5.33%, while RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) has a volatility of 16.07%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RGPM.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL-C.TO | RGPM.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.33% | 16.07% | -10.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.56% | 35.62% | -14.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.35% | 42.98% | -17.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.98% | 32.73% | -15.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 32.73% | -17.17% |
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than RGPM.NEO's 1.02% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL-C.TO nor RGPM.NEO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and RGPM.NEO have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CGL-C.TO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CGL-C.TO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and RBC Global Asset Management.. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and RGPM.NEO
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