CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and SBT.TO (Purpose Silver Bullion Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while SBT.TO is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO returned 13.90%/yr vs 13.88%/yr for SBT.TO. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for SBT.TO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 4.95% return, which is significantly higher than SBT.TO's 2.63% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CGL-C.TO having a 13.90% annualized return and SBT.TO not far behind at 13.88%.
CGL-C.TO
- 1D
- 0.54%
- 1M
- 0.13%
- YTD
- 4.95%
- 6M
- 5.44%
- 1Y
- 33.77%
- 3Y*
- 32.37%
- 5Y*
- 21.43%
- 10Y*
- 13.90%
SBT.TO
- 1D
- 0.38%
- 1M
- 0.85%
- YTD
- 2.63%
- 6M
- 26.91%
- 1Y
- 106.59%
- 3Y*
- 42.76%
- 5Y*
- 18.93%
- 10Y*
- 13.88%
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 4.95% | 55.55% | 37.41% | 10.13% | 6.11% | -4.85% | 21.75% | 11.98% | 6.86% | 4.31% |
SBT.TO Purpose Silver Bullion Fund | 2.63% | 137.07% | 18.55% | -0.86% | 1.99% | -13.18% | 48.01% | 13.31% | -12.82% | -17.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and SBT.TO is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2016 | 0.28 |
Over the past year, CGL-C.TO and SBT.TO have become more correlated (0.68) than their long-term average of 0.28, 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. SBT.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
SBT.TO
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Purpose Silver Bullion Fund (SBT.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 | SBT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.48 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.35 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.95 | 2.51 | -0.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.76 | 5.36 | -0.60 |
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 | SBT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.34 | 1.82 | -0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.27 | 0.52 | +0.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.90 | 0.21 | +0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | 0.21 | +0.39 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, smaller than the maximum SBT.TO drawdown of -47.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and SBT.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | SBT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -47.82% | +14.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -42.69% | +25.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -42.69% | +25.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -42.69% | +25.14% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | -47.82% | +25.04% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.88% | -37.23% | +22.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -16.92% | +4.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.12% | 19.98% | -12.86% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) is 5.29%, while Purpose Silver Bullion Fund (SBT.TO) has a volatility of 17.20%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SBT.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 | SBT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.29% | 17.20% | -11.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.55% | 57.92% | -36.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.34% | 59.00% | -33.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.97% | 36.64% | -19.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 66.57% | -51.01% |
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than SBT.TO's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. SBT.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL-C.TO nor SBT.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and SBT.TO have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SBT.TO is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SBT.TO is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while SBT.TO is Silver. CGL-C.TO tracks Gold, while SBT.TO tracks LBMA Silver Price. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Purpose Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.36% for SBT.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and SBT.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