CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and VEE.TO (Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price (CAD), while VEE.TO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO returned 12.86%/yr vs 9.34%/yr for VEE.TO. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for VEE.TO.

Performance

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF (VEE.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than VEE.TO's 12.66% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has outperformed VEE.TO with an annualized return of 12.86%, while VEE.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 9.34% annualized return.

CGL-C.TO

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: -7.80%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: -0.87%
• 1Y: 25.43%
• 3Y*: 30.79%
• 5Y*: 20.15%
• 10Y*: 12.86%

VEE.TO

• 1D: 0.97%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 12.66%
• 6M: 13.92%
• 1Y: 29.56%
• 3Y*: 17.76%
• 5Y*: 7.31%
• 10Y*: 9.34%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF	-0.61%	55.55%	37.41%	10.13%	6.11%	-4.85%	21.75%	11.98%	6.86%	4.31%
VEE.TO Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF	12.66%	19.32%	19.06%	6.24%	-12.79%	0.06%	12.32%	14.32%	-7.93%	22.60%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.13
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2012	0.02

Over the past year, CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO have become more correlated (0.31) than their long-term average of 0.02, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CGL-C.TO

CGL-C.TO Risk / Return Rank: 31
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 35
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 28

VEE.TO

VEE.TO Risk / Return Rank: 59
VEE.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
VEE.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
VEE.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 62
VEE.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
VEE.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF (VEE.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.

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	VEE.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.03	1.72	-0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	2.41	-0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.33	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.22	2.56	-1.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.49	9.14	-5.65

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.03, which is lower than the VEE.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.01%, roughly equal to the maximum VEE.TO drawdown of -29.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGL-C.TO	VEE.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.01%	-29.84%	-0.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.11%	-10.74%	-11.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.11%	-14.97%	-7.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.11%	-26.10%	+3.99%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.78%	-29.84%	+7.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.39%	-1.67%	-17.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.71%	-8.72%	-1.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.71%	3.01%	+4.70%

Volatility

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 7.53% compared to Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF (VEE.TO) at 6.96%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VEE.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGL-C.TO	VEE.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.53%	6.96%	+0.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.46%	13.66%	+8.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.11%	15.97%	+10.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.20%	15.42%	+1.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.65%	17.01%	-1.36%

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than VEE.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGL-C.TO vs. VEE.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VEE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.93%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VEE.TO Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF	1.93%	2.26%	2.45%	2.83%	3.35%	2.18%	1.62%	2.71%	2.24%	1.93%	2.01%	2.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO in my portfolio?

CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CGL-C.TO or VEE.TO?

On fees, VEE.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGL-C.TO or VEE.TO?

VEE.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.

What is the main difference between CGL-C.TO and VEE.TO?

CGL-C.TO is categorized as Gold, while VEE.TO is Emerging Markets Equities. CGL-C.TO tracks LBMA Gold Price (CAD), while VEE.TO tracks FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.25% for VEE.TO.