CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and TPRF.TO (TD Active Preferred Share ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while TPRF.TO is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund actively managed by TD. CGL-C.TO is passively managed, while TPRF.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CGL-C.TO returned 21.30%/yr vs 10.05%/yr for TPRF.TO. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TPRF.TO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.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 lower than TPRF.TO's 5.07% 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%
TPRF.TO
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 1.32%
- YTD
- 5.07%
- 6M
- 6.46%
- 1Y
- 17.52%
- 3Y*
- 19.71%
- 5Y*
- 10.05%
- 10Y*
- —
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 4.39% | 55.55% | 37.41% | 10.13% | 6.11% | -4.85% | 21.75% | 11.98% | 8.61% |
TPRF.TO TD Active Preferred Share ETF | 5.07% | 18.21% | 28.68% | 5.53% | -11.31% | 37.88% | 11.44% | 17.78% | -13.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and TPRF.TO is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 2018 | -0.07 |
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. TPRF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
TPRF.TO
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and TD Active Preferred Share ETF (TPRF.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 | TPRF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.47 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.92 | -0.66 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.94 | 7.07 | -5.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.77 | 39.29 | -34.53 |
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 | TPRF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33 | 4.25 | -2.92 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.26 | 1.04 | +0.22 |
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 | 0.77 | -0.18 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, smaller than the maximum TPRF.TO drawdown of -43.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and TPRF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | TPRF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -43.12% | +10.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -2.49% | -14.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -8.39% | -8.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -20.45% | +2.90% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.34% | -0.38% | -14.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -5.87% | -6.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.06% | 0.45% | +6.61% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.33% compared to TD Active Preferred Share ETF (TPRF.TO) at 1.21%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TPRF.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 | TPRF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.33% | 1.21% | +4.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.56% | 2.67% | +18.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.35% | 4.16% | +21.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.98% | 9.67% | +7.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 15.41% | +0.15% |
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than TPRF.TO's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. TPRF.TO - Dividend Comparison
CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TPRF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.50%.
| 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% |
TPRF.TO TD Active Preferred Share ETF | 4.50% | 4.36% | 4.56% | 5.74% | 10.25% | 8.28% | 10.46% | 9.90% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and TPRF.TO have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TPRF.TO is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TPRF.TO is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while TPRF.TO is Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and TD. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.50% for TPRF.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and TPRF.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