PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGL-C.TO vs. XMD.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

CGL-C.TO vs. XMD.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) and iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.TO).

CGL-C.TO and XMD.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CGL-C.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Mar 31, 2011. XMD.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Morningstar Canada Sml GR CAD. It was launched on Mar 2, 2001. Both CGL-C.TO and XMD.TO are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

CGL-C.TO vs. XMD.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 iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF		10.00%55.55%37.41%10.13%6.11%-4.85%21.75%11.98%6.86%4.31%
XMD.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF		7.32%41.38%23.55%10.01%-4.90%13.78%6.05%26.03%-13.07%6.17%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 10.00% return, which is significantly higher than XMD.TO's 7.32% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has outperformed XMD.TO with an annualized return of 14.43%, while XMD.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 12.14% annualized return.

CGL-C.TO

1D
3.62%
1M
-9.28%
YTD
10.00%
6M
20.69%
1Y
43.80%
3Y*
33.85%
5Y*
23.89%
10Y*
14.43%

XMD.TO

1D
4.07%
1M
-8.77%
YTD
7.32%
6M
15.79%
1Y
51.11%
3Y*
24.72%
5Y*
15.89%
10Y*
12.14%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Gold Bullion ETF

iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF

Often compared with CGL-C.TO:
CGL-C.TO vs. CGL.TOCGL-C.TO vs. MNT.TOCGL-C.TO vs. GLDCGL-C.TO vs. PHYS.TOCGL-C.TO vs. ZGLD.TOCGL-C.TO vs. ABX.TOCGL-C.TO vs. HUG.TO
Often compared with XMD.TO:
XMD.TO vs. XCS.TOXMD.TO vs. XIU.TOXMD.TO vs. VFV.TOXMD.TO vs. XCSR.TOXMD.TO vs. XCG.TOXMD.TO vs. VUN.TOXMD.TO vs. VEQT.TO

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

CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than XMD.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.

XMD.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF

Return for Risk

CGL-C.TO vs. XMD.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: 8585
Overall Rank
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
XMD.TO
XMD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
XMD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
XMD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
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. XMD.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 S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.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.TOXMD.TODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.68

2.45

-0.77

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.14

2.93

-0.78

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.48

-0.16

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.69

3.42

-0.73

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.29

14.24

-4.95

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is lower than the XMD.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL-C.TO and XMD.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CGL-C.TOXMD.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.68

2.45

-0.77

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.44

0.98

+0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.94

0.73

+0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.54

+0.09

Correlation

The correlation between CGL-C.TO and XMD.TO is 0.12, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

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

CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XMD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XMD.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF		0.87%0.97%1.58%1.91%2.24%1.17%1.91%2.55%2.44%1.76%1.97%2.34%

Drawdowns

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

The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, smaller than the maximum XMD.TO drawdown of -53.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and XMD.TO.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

CGL-C.TOXMD.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.04%

-53.42%

+20.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.37%

-15.12%

-2.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.55%

-18.16%

+0.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.78%

-43.40%

+20.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.79%

-8.84%

-1.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.23%

-8.21%

-4.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.03%

3.63%

+1.40%

Volatility

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

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 10.97% compared to iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.TO) at 8.82%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period

CGL-C.TOXMD.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.97%

8.82%

+2.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.21%

16.94%

+6.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.21%

20.98%

+5.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.73%

16.38%

+0.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.49%

16.82%

-1.33%