CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and SDAY.NEO (Hamilton Enhanced U.S. Equity DayMAX™ ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price (CAD), while SDAY.NEO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Hamilton Capital. CGL-C.TO is passively managed, while SDAY.NEO is actively managed. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for SDAY.NEO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 1.94% return, which is significantly lower than SDAY.NEO's 12.66% 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%
SDAY.NEO
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 6.53%
- YTD
- 12.66%
- 6M
- 10.59%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 1.94% | 28.22% |
SDAY.NEO Hamilton Enhanced U.S. Equity DayMAX™ ETF | 12.66% | 4.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and SDAY.NEO is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025 | 0.12 |
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. SDAY.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
SDAY.NEO
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Hamilton Enhanced U.S. Equity DayMAX™ ETF (SDAY.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.
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.TO | SDAY.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.30 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.69 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.01%, which is greater than SDAY.NEO's maximum drawdown of -7.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and SDAY.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | SDAY.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.01% | -7.75% | -22.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.33% | 0.00% | -17.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.72% | -1.81% | -8.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.79% | — | — |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL-C.TO | SDAY.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.08% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.58% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.24% | 11.59% | +14.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.24% | 11.59% | +5.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.67% | 11.59% | +4.08% |
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than SDAY.NEO's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. SDAY.NEO - Dividend Comparison
CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SDAY.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.66%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SDAY.NEO Hamilton Enhanced U.S. Equity DayMAX™ ETF | 16.66% | 8.62% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and SDAY.NEO have a correlation of 0.12, 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 0.85% for SDAY.NEO.
CGL-C.TO is categorized as Gold, while SDAY.NEO is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Hamilton Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.85% for SDAY.NEO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and SDAY.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