PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CGL-C.TO vs. XUS.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) and XUS.TO (iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while XUS.TO 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 13.74%/yr vs 15.98%/yr for XUS.TO. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. CGL-C.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for XUS.TO.

Performance

CGL-C.TO vs. XUS.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 Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGL-C.TO achieves a 4.39% return, which is significantly lower than XUS.TO's 12.21% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL-C.TO has underperformed XUS.TO with an annualized return of 13.74%, while XUS.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 15.98% annualized 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%

XUS.TO

1D
-0.31%
1M
7.22%
YTD
12.21%
6M
10.39%
1Y
29.30%
3Y*
23.52%
5Y*
16.78%
10Y*
15.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF		4.39%55.55%37.41%10.13%6.11%-4.85%21.75%11.98%6.86%4.31%
XUS.TO
iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF		12.21%12.19%35.16%23.31%-12.59%27.20%15.56%24.57%3.31%13.56%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL-C.TO and XUS.TO is 0.09, 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

0.09

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.03

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.07

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2013

-0.08

The correlation between CGL-C.TO and XUS.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (all time) to 0.09 (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.

iShares Gold Bullion ETF

iShares Core S&P 500 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. XMD.TO
Often compared with XUS.TO:
XUS.TO vs. XSP.TOXUS.TO vs. XEQT.TOXUS.TO vs. XUU.TOXUS.TO vs. ZSP.TOXUS.TO vs. VOOXUS.TO vs. XEF.TOXUS.TO vs. HXS.TO

Return for Risk

CGL-C.TO vs. XUS.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: 3535
Overall Rank
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
XUS.TO
XUS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
XUS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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. XUS.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 Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.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.TOXUS.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.33
2.55

-1.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.75
3.47

-1.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.47

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.94

3.41

-1.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.77

12.94

-8.17

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. XUS.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is lower than the XUS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL-C.TO and XUS.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CGL-C.TOXUS.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.33

2.55

-1.21

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.26

1.13

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.89

0.98

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

1.08

-0.48

Drawdowns

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

The maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.04%, which is greater than XUS.TO's maximum drawdown of -27.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL-C.TO and XUS.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGL-C.TOXUS.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.04%

-27.23%

-5.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.37%

-8.63%

-8.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.37%

-18.96%

+1.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.55%

-21.85%

+4.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.78%

-27.23%

+4.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.34%

-0.31%

-15.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.24%

-3.46%

-8.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.06%

2.27%

+4.79%

Volatility

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

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.33% compared to iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) at 3.19%. This indicates that CGL-C.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XUS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CGL-C.TOXUS.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.33%

3.19%

+2.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.56%

8.66%

+12.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.35%

11.58%

+13.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.98%

14.92%

+2.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.56%

16.48%

-0.92%

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

CGL-C.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than XUS.TO's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

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

CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XUS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XUS.TO
iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF		1.12%1.26%1.03%1.22%1.38%0.99%1.35%2.02%1.77%1.48%1.66%1.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGL-C.TO and XUS.TO have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XUS.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XUS.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.

CGL-C.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while XUS.TO is S&P 500. CGL-C.TO tracks Gold, while XUS.TO tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL-C.TO and 0.09% for XUS.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGL-C.TO and XUS.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