CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.TO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and SVR-C.TO (iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while SVR-C.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 16.34%/yr for SVR-C.TO. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for SVR-C.TO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.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 SVR-C.TO's 4.34% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has underperformed SVR-C.TO with an annualized return of 13.90%, while SVR-C.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 16.34% annualized return.
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%
SVR-C.TO
- 1D
- 0.73%
- 1M
- 3.50%
- YTD
- 4.34%
- 6M
- 27.93%
- 1Y
- 114.32%
- 3Y*
- 47.04%
- 5Y*
- 24.42%
- 10Y*
- 16.34%
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.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% |
SVR-C.TO iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) | 4.34% | 132.91% | 30.61% | -2.65% | 9.31% | -12.72% | 43.88% | 9.28% | -2.35% | -2.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and SVR-C.TO is 0.71, 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2011 | 0.49 |
Over the past year, CGL-C.TO and SVR-C.TO have become more correlated (0.71) 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. SVR-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
SVR-C.TO
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.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 Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) (SVR-C.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 | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.37 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.95 | 2.77 | -0.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.76 | 5.90 | -1.15 |
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 | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.34 | 2.03 | -0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.27 | 0.72 | +0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.90 | 0.56 | +0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | 0.23 | +0.37 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, smaller than the maximum SVR-C.TO drawdown of -61.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and SVR-C.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -61.14% | +28.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -41.54% | +24.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -41.54% | +24.17% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -41.54% | +23.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | -41.54% | +18.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.88% | -35.45% | +20.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -35.58% | +23.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.12% | 19.43% | -12.31% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) is 5.29%, while iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) (SVR-C.TO) has a volatility of 16.02%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SVR-C.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 | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.29% | 16.02% | -10.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.55% | 55.45% | -33.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.34% | 56.72% | -31.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.97% | 36.56% | -19.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 33.57% | -18.01% |
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than SVR-C.TO's 0.66% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL-C.TO nor SVR-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and SVR-C.TO have a correlation of 0.71, 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 0.66% for SVR-C.TO.
CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while SVR-C.TO is Silver. CGL-C.TO tracks Gold, while SVR-C.TO tracks LBMA Silver Price. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.66% for SVR-C.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and SVR-C.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