PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGL.TO vs. PMIF.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CGL.TO vs. PMIF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and PMIF.TO (PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada)) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold Bullion, while PMIF.TO is a fund fund. Over the past 5 years, CGL.TO returned 16.83%/yr vs 3.16%/yr for PMIF.TO. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CGL.TO vs. PMIF.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 PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada) (PMIF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a 2.15% return, which is significantly higher than PMIF.TO's 0.10% return.

CGL.TO

1D
-0.83%
1M
-1.87%
YTD
2.15%
6M
4.29%
1Y
29.45%
3Y*
29.31%
5Y*
16.83%
10Y*
11.98%

PMIF.TO

1D
-0.17%
1M
0.49%
YTD
0.10%
6M
0.42%
1Y
6.74%
3Y*
6.44%
5Y*
3.16%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.15%60.12%25.67%11.26%-1.07%-4.58%23.41%16.58%-3.19%2.27%
PMIF.TO
PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada)		0.10%9.01%5.20%7.58%-6.32%1.90%3.93%7.09%0.59%0.54%

Correlation

The correlation between CGL.TO and PMIF.TO is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.24

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.22

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.25

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 3, 2017

0.20

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)

PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada)

Often compared with CGL.TO:
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TOCGL.TO vs. XGD.TOCGL.TO vs. KILO.TOCGL.TO vs. MNT.TOCGL.TO vs. GLDMCGL.TO vs. VOOCGL.TO vs. SVR.TO
Often compared with PMIF.TO:
PMIF.TO vs. ZAG.TOPMIF.TO vs. XBB.TOPMIF.TO vs. CBIL.TOPMIF.TO vs. CASH.TOPMIF.TO vs. PFIA.TOPMIF.TO vs. CAAAPMIF.TO vs. CCBI.TO

Return for Risk

CGL.TO vs. PMIF.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: 2929
Overall Rank
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank
PMIF.TO
PMIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
PMIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
PMIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
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. PMIF.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 PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada) (PMIF.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.TOPMIF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.10
1.93

-0.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.51
2.77

-1.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.36

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.53

2.10

-0.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.75

7.96

-4.21

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is lower than the PMIF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGL.TO and PMIF.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CGL.TOPMIF.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.10

1.93

-0.83

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

0.66

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.73

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.57

-0.09

Drawdowns

CGL.TO vs. PMIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.53%, which is greater than PMIF.TO's maximum drawdown of -18.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and PMIF.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGL.TOPMIF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.53%

-18.30%

-26.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.36%

-3.22%

-16.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.36%

-3.98%

-15.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.18%

-10.25%

-11.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.72%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.22%

-1.21%

-17.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.16%

-1.88%

-16.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.88%

0.85%

+7.03%

Volatility

CGL.TO vs. PMIF.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.60% compared to PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada) (PMIF.TO) at 1.64%. This indicates that CGL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CGL.TOPMIF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.60%

1.64%

+3.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.18%

2.89%

+20.29%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.89%

3.52%

+23.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.33%

4.79%

+13.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.41%

5.83%

+10.58%

Dividends

CGL.TO vs. PMIF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PMIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.42%.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
PMIF.TO
PIMCO Monthly Income Fund (Canada)		5.42%5.50%6.95%6.06%3.73%3.22%3.58%3.80%3.51%0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGL.TO and PMIF.TO have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGL.TO and PMIF.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