CGL.TO vs. VTV
CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and VTV (Vanguard Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion, while VTV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Large Cap Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO returned 10.99%/yr vs 13.75%/yr for VTV. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGL.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for VTV.
Performance
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CGL.TO is traded in CAD, while VTV is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the VTV 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 VTV's 16.61% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO has underperformed VTV with an annualized return of 10.99%, while VTV has yielded a comparatively higher 13.75% annualized 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%
VTV
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- 5.89%
- YTD
- 16.61%
- 6M
- 15.61%
- 1Y
- 31.43%
- 3Y*
- 19.93%
- 5Y*
- 15.04%
- 10Y*
- 13.75%
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) | -3.19% | 60.08% | 25.70% | 11.26% | -1.07% | -4.58% | 23.41% | 16.58% | -3.19% | 11.68% |
VTV Vanguard Value ETF | 16.61% | 10.01% | 25.77% | 6.71% | 4.12% | 26.47% | -0.10% | 20.48% | 2.47% | 9.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL.TO and VTV is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2010 | 0.02 |
The correlation between CGL.TO and VTV shifts across timeframes, from 0.02 (all time) to 0.18 (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. VTV — Risk / Return Rank
CGL.TO
VTV
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) and Vanguard Value ETF (VTV). 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 | VTV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.47 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.87 | 5.21 | -4.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.49 | 19.15 | -16.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.96%, smaller than the maximum VTV drawdown of -52.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and VTV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL.TO | VTV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.96% | -52.38% | +6.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.93% | -5.74% | -19.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.93% | -15.12% | -9.81% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.93% | -15.12% | -9.81% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.93% | -31.22% | +6.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.50% | 0.00% | -22.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.30% | -9.15% | -11.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.66% | 1.56% | +7.10% |
Volatility
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Volatility Comparison
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a higher volatility of 7.67% compared to Vanguard Value ETF (VTV) at 3.58%. This indicates that CGL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VTV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL.TO | VTV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.67% | 3.58% | +4.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.08% | 8.63% | +15.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.61% | 11.27% | +16.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.54% | 15.09% | +3.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.53% | 17.74% | -1.21% |
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than VTV's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL.TO vs. VTV - Dividend Comparison
CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VTV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%.
| 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% |
VTV Vanguard Value ETF | 1.83% | 2.05% | 2.31% | 2.46% | 2.52% | 2.15% | 2.56% | 2.50% | 2.73% | 2.29% | 2.44% | 2.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL.TO and VTV have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, VTV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VTV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL.TO.
CGL.TO is categorized as Gold, while VTV is Large Cap Value Equities. CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion, while VTV tracks CRSP US Large Cap Value Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL.TO and 0.04% for VTV.
Find the right allocation for CGL.TO and VTV
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