CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO
CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and SVR-C.TO (iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold Bullion, while SVR-C.TO is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO returned 11.98%/yr vs 16.32%/yr for SVR-C.TO. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGL.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for SVR-C.TO.
Performance
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a 2.15% return, which is significantly lower than SVR-C.TO's 3.58% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO has underperformed SVR-C.TO with an annualized return of 11.98%, while SVR-C.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 16.32% annualized 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%
SVR-C.TO
- 1D
- -2.08%
- 1M
- 2.36%
- YTD
- 3.58%
- 6M
- 23.35%
- 1Y
- 112.17%
- 3Y*
- 46.44%
- 5Y*
- 24.24%
- 10Y*
- 16.32%
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 11.68% |
SVR-C.TO iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) | 3.58% | 132.91% | 30.61% | -2.65% | 9.31% | -12.72% | 43.88% | 9.28% | -2.35% | -2.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL.TO and SVR-C.TO is 0.71, 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2011 | 0.53 |
The correlation between CGL.TO and SVR-C.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (10 years) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. SVR-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL.TO
SVR-C.TO
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.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 Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) (SVR-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.
| CGL.TO | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.89 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.36 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.53 | 2.72 | -1.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.75 | 5.83 | -2.08 |
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 | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.10 | 1.99 | -0.89 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 | 0.72 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.73 | 0.56 | +0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.23 | +0.25 |
Drawdowns
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.53%, smaller than the maximum SVR-C.TO drawdown of -61.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and SVR-C.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL.TO | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.53% | -61.14% | +16.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.36% | -41.54% | +22.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.36% | -41.54% | +22.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.18% | -41.54% | +19.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.72% | -41.54% | +17.82% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.22% | -35.92% | +17.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.16% | -35.58% | +17.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.88% | 19.30% | -11.42% |
Volatility
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) is 5.60%, while iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) (SVR-C.TO) has a volatility of 16.01%. This indicates that CGL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SVR-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL.TO | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.60% | 16.01% | -10.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.18% | 55.45% | -32.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.89% | 56.72% | -29.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.33% | 36.57% | -18.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.41% | 33.57% | -17.16% |
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than SVR-C.TO's 0.66% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL.TO vs. SVR-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither CGL.TO nor SVR-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL.TO and SVR-C.TO have a correlation of 0.71, 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 0.66% for SVR-C.TO.
CGL.TO is categorized as Precious Metals, while SVR-C.TO is Silver. CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion, while SVR-C.TO tracks LBMA Silver Price. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL.TO and 0.66% for SVR-C.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL.TO and SVR-C.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