CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TO
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO).
CGL.TO and CGL-C.TO 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. CGL-C.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Mar 31, 2011. Both CGL.TO and CGL-C.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.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CGL.TO or CGL-C.TO.
Key characteristics
| CGL.TO | CGL-C.TO | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 13.15% | 16.80% |
| 1Y Return | 16.25% | 17.51% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 8.35% | 12.65% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 11.49% | 12.45% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 4.98% | 7.98% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.31 | 1.45 |
| Daily Std Dev | 12.50% | 11.80% |
| Max Drawdown | -45.96% | -33.04% |
| Current Drawdown | -2.35% | -3.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL.TO and CGL-C.TO is 0.82, 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. CGL-C.TO - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a 13.15% return, which is significantly lower than CGL-C.TO's 16.80% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO has underperformed CGL-C.TO with an annualized return of 4.98%, while CGL-C.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 7.98% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
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. CGL-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CGL.TO and CGL-C.TO have an expense ratio of 0.55%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.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.
Dividends
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL.TO nor CGL-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.96%, which is greater than CGL-C.TO's maximum drawdown of -33.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and CGL-C.TO. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.47% compared to iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) at 4.84%. This indicates that CGL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGL-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.