PortfoliosLab logo
Tools
Performance Analysis
Risk Analysis
Optimization
Factor Model
See All Tools
Portfolio Analysis
Portfolios
Lazy PortfoliosUser Portfolios
Discussions
CGL.TO vs. AAAU
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Key characteristics


CGL.TOAAAU
YTD Return12.12%12.38%
1Y Return14.91%15.78%
3Y Return (Ann)7.95%9.11%
5Y Return (Ann)11.31%12.35%
Sharpe Ratio1.231.34
Daily Std Dev12.50%12.20%
Max Drawdown-45.96%-21.63%
Current Drawdown-3.24%-2.96%

Correlation

-0.50.00.51.00.9

The correlation between CGL.TO and AAAU is 0.87, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Performance

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CGL.TO having a 12.12% return and AAAU slightly higher at 12.38%. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.


0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%NovemberDecember2024FebruaryMarchApril
16.92%
17.02%
CGL.TO
AAAU

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 (CAD-Hedged)

Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGL.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than AAAU's 0.18% expense ratio.


CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)
Expense ratio chart for CGL.TO: current value at 0.55% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.55%
Expense ratio chart for AAAU: current value at 0.18% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.18%

Risk-Adjusted Performance

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). 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.TO
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for CGL.TO, currently valued at 0.95, compared to the broader market-1.000.001.002.003.004.000.95
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for CGL.TO, currently valued at 1.48, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.008.001.48
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for CGL.TO, currently valued at 1.17, compared to the broader market1.001.502.001.17
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for CGL.TO, currently valued at 0.76, compared to the broader market0.002.004.006.008.0010.000.76
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for CGL.TO, currently valued at 2.72, compared to the broader market0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.002.72
AAAU
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for AAAU, currently valued at 1.39, compared to the broader market-1.000.001.002.003.004.001.39
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for AAAU, currently valued at 2.12, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.008.002.12
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for AAAU, currently valued at 1.25, compared to the broader market1.001.502.001.26
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for AAAU, currently valued at 1.37, compared to the broader market0.002.004.006.008.0010.001.37
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for AAAU, currently valued at 3.74, compared to the broader market0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.003.74

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which roughly equals the AAAU Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the 12-month rolling Sharpe Ratio of CGL.TO and AAAU.


Rolling 12-month Sharpe Ratio0.000.501.001.50NovemberDecember2024FebruaryMarchApril
0.95
1.39
CGL.TO
AAAU

Dividends

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison

Neither CGL.TO nor AAAU has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.96%, which is greater than AAAU's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and AAAU. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.


-15.00%-10.00%-5.00%0.00%NovemberDecember2024FebruaryMarchApril
-2.62%
-2.96%
CGL.TO
AAAU

Volatility

CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.47% compared to Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) at 5.05%. This indicates that CGL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


2.50%3.00%3.50%4.00%4.50%5.00%5.50%6.00%NovemberDecember2024FebruaryMarchApril
5.47%
5.05%
CGL.TO
AAAU