CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO
CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion, while GLCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. CGL.TO is passively managed, while GLCC.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO returned 12.09%/yr vs 14.76%/yr for GLCC.TO. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGL.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLCC.TO.
Performance
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a 2.98% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's 1.66% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO has underperformed GLCC.TO with an annualized return of 12.09%, while GLCC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 14.76% annualized return.
CGL.TO
- 1D
- 0.80%
- 1M
- -1.89%
- YTD
- 2.98%
- 6M
- 4.94%
- 1Y
- 29.90%
- 3Y*
- 29.26%
- 5Y*
- 17.02%
- 10Y*
- 12.09%
GLCC.TO
- 1D
- 2.12%
- 1M
- 3.66%
- YTD
- 1.66%
- 6M
- 6.30%
- 1Y
- 63.73%
- 3Y*
- 41.85%
- 5Y*
- 21.81%
- 10Y*
- 14.76%
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 2.98% | 60.12% | 25.67% | 11.26% | -1.07% | -4.58% | 23.41% | 16.58% | -3.19% | 11.68% |
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | 1.66% | 137.43% | 20.18% | 6.19% | -1.80% | -9.37% | 15.00% | 38.72% | -0.38% | 7.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL.TO and GLCC.TO is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2011 | 0.71 |
The correlation between CGL.TO and GLCC.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL.TO
GLCC.TO
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.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 Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.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.TO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.28 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 2.22 | -0.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.77 | 5.97 | -2.21 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CGL.TO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.12 | 1.54 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 | 0.69 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 | 0.46 | +0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.00 | +0.48 |
Drawdowns
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.53%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -71.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and GLCC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL.TO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.53% | -71.12% | +26.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.36% | -28.86% | +9.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.36% | -28.86% | +9.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.18% | -37.60% | +15.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.72% | -44.83% | +21.11% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.55% | -21.81% | +4.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.16% | -34.43% | +16.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.95% | 10.70% | -2.75% |
Volatility
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) is 5.60%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 15.10%. This indicates that CGL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL.TO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.60% | 15.10% | -9.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.18% | 34.13% | -10.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.88% | 41.73% | -14.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.33% | 31.95% | -13.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.41% | 31.95% | -15.54% |
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than GLCC.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison
CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.51%.
| 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% |
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | 8.51% | 6.01% | 10.30% | 11.16% | 10.08% | 6.31% | 6.47% | 4.58% | 5.62% | 7.09% | 9.21% | 11.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL.TO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
CGL.TO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.
CGL.TO is categorized as Gold, while GLCC.TO is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL.TO and 0.79% for GLCC.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL.TO and GLCC.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