CGL.TO vs. COW.TO

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and COW.TO (iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion, while COW.TO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Manulife Investment Management Global Agriculture Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO returned 11.18%/yr vs 8.27%/yr for COW.TO. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. CGL.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for COW.TO.

Performance

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a -0.75% return, which is significantly lower than COW.TO's 14.00% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO has outperformed COW.TO with an annualized return of 11.18%, while COW.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 8.27% annualized return.

CGL.TO

• 1D: 2.52%
• 1M: -5.26%
• YTD: -0.75%
• 6M: -0.60%
• 1Y: 22.95%
• 3Y*: 27.87%
• 5Y*: 16.95%
• 10Y*: 11.18%

COW.TO

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: -0.63%
• YTD: 14.00%
• 6M: 6.80%
• 1Y: 4.28%
• 3Y*: 5.57%
• 5Y*: 3.92%
• 10Y*: 8.27%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	-0.75%	60.08%	25.70%	11.26%	-1.07%	-4.58%	23.41%	16.58%	-3.19%	11.68%
COW.TO iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF	14.00%	-4.34%	5.62%	-8.61%	12.62%	19.09%	11.78%	26.04%	-14.16%	14.90%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL.TO and COW.TO is 0.07, 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	0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.03
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2010	-0.03

The correlation between CGL.TO and COW.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (10 years) to 0.07 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CGL.TO

CGL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 24
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 28
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

COW.TO

COW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 12
COW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
COW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
COW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 12
COW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
COW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 13

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.TO vs. COW.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	CGL.TO	COW.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.83	0.27	+0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.21	0.51	+0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.06	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.92	0.32	+0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.64	0.78	+1.86

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is higher than the COW.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL.TO and COW.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.

Drawdowns

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.96%, smaller than the maximum COW.TO drawdown of -55.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and COW.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGL.TO	COW.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.96%	-55.00%	+9.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.93%	-13.43%	-11.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.93%	-14.51%	-10.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.93%	-29.84%	+4.91%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.93%	-42.38%	+17.45%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.54%	-12.04%	-8.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.30%	-14.69%	-5.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.75%	5.51%	+3.24%

Volatility

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a higher volatility of 8.23% compared to iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) at 3.57%. This indicates that CGL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COW.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGL.TO	COW.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.23%	3.57%	+4.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.17%	12.85%	+11.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.71%	16.21%	+11.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.58%	18.92%	-0.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.55%	21.84%	-5.29%

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGL.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than COW.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGL.TO vs. COW.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.16%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
COW.TO iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF	2.16%	2.46%	1.43%	1.62%	2.01%	0.69%	1.13%	1.13%	1.18%	0.63%	1.21%	1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGL.TO and COW.TO in my portfolio?

CGL.TO and COW.TO have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CGL.TO or COW.TO?

On fees, CGL.TO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGL.TO or COW.TO?

CGL.TO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for COW.TO.

What is the main difference between CGL.TO and COW.TO?

CGL.TO is categorized as Gold, while COW.TO is Large Cap Blend Equities. CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion, while COW.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Agriculture Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL.TO and 0.72% for COW.TO.