CGL-C.TO vs. VOO
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and VOO (Vanguard S&P 500 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while VOO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO returned 13.90%/yr vs 16.45%/yr for VOO. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VOO.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CGL-C.TO is traded in CAD, while VOO is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the VOO values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 4.95% return, which is significantly lower than VOO's 12.32% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has underperformed VOO with an annualized return of 13.90%, while VOO has yielded a comparatively higher 16.45% 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%
VOO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 6.34%
- YTD
- 12.32%
- 6M
- 10.35%
- 1Y
- 30.17%
- 3Y*
- 23.88%
- 5Y*
- 17.15%
- 10Y*
- 16.45%
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - 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% |
VOO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF | 12.32% | 12.42% | 35.71% | 23.54% | -12.34% | 27.63% | 16.32% | 24.91% | 3.60% | 14.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and VOO is 0.05, 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 | 0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2011 | -0.08 |
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and VOO shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (10 years) to 0.05 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. VOO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
VOO
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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 | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.50 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.95 | 3.52 | -1.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.76 | 13.38 | -8.63 |
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 | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.34 | 2.60 | -1.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.27 | 1.16 | +0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.90 | 1.01 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | 1.15 | -0.55 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, which is greater than VOO's maximum drawdown of -27.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and VOO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -27.65% | -5.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -8.62% | -8.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -18.93% | +1.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -22.08% | +4.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | -27.65% | +4.87% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.88% | -0.29% | -14.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -3.24% | -9.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.12% | 2.26% | +4.86% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.29% compared to Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) at 2.73%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL-C.TO | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.29% | 2.73% | +2.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.55% | 8.83% | +12.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.34% | 11.65% | +13.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.97% | 14.92% | +2.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 16.28% | -0.72% |
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than VOO's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. VOO - Dividend Comparison
CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VOO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%.
| 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% |
VOO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF | 1.02% | 1.13% | 1.24% | 1.46% | 1.69% | 1.25% | 1.54% | 1.88% | 2.06% | 1.78% | 2.02% | 2.10% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and VOO have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, VOO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VOO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while VOO is S&P 500. CGL-C.TO tracks Gold, while VOO tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.03% for VOO.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and VOO
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