CGL.TO vs. IONQ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) is Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion, while IONQ (IonQ, Inc.) is a stock. Over the past 5 years, CGL.TO returned 15.73%/yr vs 44.61%/yr for IONQ. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CGL.TO vs. IONQ - 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 IonQ, Inc. (IONQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CGL.TO is traded in CAD, while IONQ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IONQ 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 -3.19% return, which is significantly lower than IONQ's 31.54% return.

CGL.TO

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -9.62%
• YTD: -3.19%
• 6M: -3.25%
• 1Y: 19.93%
• 3Y*: 27.16%
• 5Y*: 15.73%
• 10Y*: 10.99%

IONQ

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 2.63%
• YTD: 31.54%
• 6M: 16.54%
• 1Y: 57.11%
• 3Y*: 78.53%
• 5Y*: 44.61%
• 10Y*: —

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

CGL.TO vs. IONQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	-3.19%	60.08%	25.70%	11.26%	-1.07%	-4.58%
IONQ IonQ, Inc.	31.54%	2.52%	265.67%	250.59%	-78.03%	50.37%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL.TO and IONQ is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.09
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2021	0.08

Return for Risk

CGL.TO vs. IONQ — 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: 23
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 27
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

IONQ

IONQ Risk / Return Rank: 61
IONQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
IONQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IONQ Omega Ratio Rank: 62
IONQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
IONQ Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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. IONQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and IonQ, Inc. (IONQ). 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	IONQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.78	0.57	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.15	1.47	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.16	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.87	0.78	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.49	1.40	+1.09

CGL.TO vs. IONQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is higher than the IONQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL.TO and IONQ, 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. IONQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.96%, smaller than the maximum IONQ drawdown of -89.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and IONQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGL.TO	IONQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.96%	-89.21%	+43.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.93%	-67.84%	+42.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.93%	-67.84%	+42.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.93%	-89.21%	+64.28%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.93%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.50%	-29.66%	+7.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.30%	-50.36%	+30.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.66%	37.76%	-29.10%

Volatility

CGL.TO vs. IONQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) is 7.67%, while IonQ, Inc. (IONQ) has a volatility of 31.60%. This indicates that CGL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IONQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGL.TO	IONQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.67%	31.60%	-23.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.08%	68.87%	-44.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.61%	93.24%	-65.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.54%	100.62%	-82.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.53%	97.74%	-81.21%

Dividends

CGL.TO vs. IONQ - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

CGL.TO and IONQ have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.