CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L
CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and XGDU.L (Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities) are both Precious Metals funds tracking the Gold, from iShares and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CGL-C.TO returned 21.43%/yr vs 22.03%/yr for XGDU.L. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for XGDU.L.
Performance
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CGL-C.TO is traded in CAD, while XGDU.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XGDU.L values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CGL-C.TO having a 4.95% return and XGDU.L slightly higher at 5.19%.
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%
XGDU.L
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- -0.29%
- YTD
- 5.19%
- 6M
- 5.62%
- 1Y
- 34.60%
- 3Y*
- 33.04%
- 5Y*
- 22.03%
- 10Y*
- —
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 4.95% | 55.55% | 37.41% | 10.13% | 6.11% | -4.85% | -0.38% |
XGDU.L Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities | 5.19% | 57.15% | 37.04% | 10.95% | 6.65% | -4.50% | 0.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and XGDU.L is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2020 | 0.76 |
The correlation between CGL-C.TO and XGDU.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. XGDU.L — Risk / Return Rank
CGL-C.TO
XGDU.L
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.L). 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 | XGDU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.28 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.95 | 2.01 | -0.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.76 | 5.28 | -0.52 |
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 | XGDU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.34 | 1.44 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.27 | 1.33 | -0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.90 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | 1.03 | -0.43 |
Drawdowns
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, which is greater than XGDU.L's maximum drawdown of -22.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and XGDU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL-C.TO | XGDU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.04% | -22.83% | -10.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.37% | -17.15% | -0.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.37% | -17.15% | -0.22% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -17.15% | -0.40% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.78% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.88% | -14.36% | -0.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -8.29% | -3.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.12% | 6.54% | +0.58% |
Volatility
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) is 5.29%, while Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.L) has a volatility of 6.07%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XGDU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL-C.TO | XGDU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.29% | 6.07% | -0.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.55% | 20.75% | +0.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.34% | 23.85% | +1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.97% | 16.68% | +0.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.56% | 16.79% | -1.23% |
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than XGDU.L's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL-C.TO vs. XGDU.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL-C.TO nor XGDU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL-C.TO and XGDU.L have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XGDU.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XGDU.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
Both ETFs track Gold. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.12% for XGDU.L.
Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and XGDU.L
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