CGL.TO vs. AAAU
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU).
CGL.TO and AAAU are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CGL.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold Bullion. It was launched on May 28, 2009. AAAU is a passively managed fund by Goldman Sachs that tracks the performance of the LBMA Gold PM Price. It was launched on Jul 26, 2018. Both CGL.TO and AAAU 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.TO vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 8.13% | 60.12% | 25.67% | 11.26% | -1.07% | -4.58% | 23.41% | 16.58% | 8.98% |
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 10.02% | 56.54% | 37.82% | 10.47% | 6.60% | -4.88% | 22.90% | 12.37% | 13.40% |
Different Trading Currencies
CGL.TO is traded in CAD, while AAAU is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the AAAU values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a 8.13% return, which is significantly lower than AAAU's 10.02% return.
CGL.TO
- 1D
- 3.91%
- 1M
- -11.27%
- YTD
- 8.13%
- 6M
- 19.83%
- 1Y
- 45.70%
- 3Y*
- 31.08%
- 5Y*
- 20.28%
- 10Y*
- 12.77%
AAAU
- 1D
- 3.65%
- 1M
- -9.28%
- YTD
- 10.02%
- 6M
- 21.06%
- 1Y
- 44.60%
- 3Y*
- 34.46%
- 5Y*
- 24.38%
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
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.
Return for Risk
CGL.TO vs. AAAU — Risk / Return Rank
CGL.TO
AAAU
CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends 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 | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.65 | 1.74 | -0.09 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.10 | 2.19 | -0.09 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.33 | -0.02 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.47 | 2.75 | -0.28 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.06 | 9.58 | -0.53 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CGL.TO | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.65 | 1.74 | -0.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.14 | 1.49 | -0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.79 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.51 | 1.27 | -0.77 |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL.TO and AAAU is 0.83, 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.
Dividends
CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL.TO nor AAAU has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.53%, which is greater than AAAU's maximum drawdown of -22.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and AAAU.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL.TO | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.53% | -21.63% | -22.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.36% | -19.13% | -0.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.18% | -20.94% | -1.24% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.43% | -13.19% | -0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.20% | -6.00% | -12.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.29% | 5.16% | +0.13% |
Volatility
CGL.TO vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) have volatilities of 11.20% and 10.77%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| CGL.TO | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.20% | 10.77% | +0.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.10% | 22.98% | +1.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.83% | 25.86% | +1.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.98% | 16.46% | +1.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.28% | 16.23% | +0.05% |