CGL.TO vs. ZGD.TO
CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and ZGD.TO (BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF) are both Gold funds - CGL.TO tracks the Gold Bullion while ZGD.TO tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO returned 12.09%/yr vs 18.24%/yr for ZGD.TO. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGL.TO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for ZGD.TO.
Performance
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGL.TO achieves a 2.98% return, which is significantly lower than ZGD.TO's 7.53% return. Over the past 10 years, CGL.TO has underperformed ZGD.TO with an annualized return of 12.09%, while ZGD.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 18.24% 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%
ZGD.TO
- 1D
- 1.20%
- 1M
- 3.43%
- YTD
- 7.53%
- 6M
- 13.94%
- 1Y
- 84.61%
- 3Y*
- 57.12%
- 5Y*
- 30.91%
- 10Y*
- 18.24%
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.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% |
ZGD.TO BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF | 7.53% | 170.64% | 37.48% | 10.17% | -2.30% | -12.57% | 26.59% | 53.72% | -12.09% | -0.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGL.TO and ZGD.TO is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 27, 2012 | 0.63 |
The correlation between CGL.TO and ZGD.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (all time) to 0.78 (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. ZGD.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CGL.TO
ZGD.TO
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.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 BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.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 | ZGD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.32 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 2.82 | -1.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.77 | 7.62 | -3.85 |
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 | ZGD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.12 | 1.89 | -0.77 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 | 0.85 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 | 0.49 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.29 | +0.19 |
Drawdowns
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGL.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.53%, smaller than the maximum ZGD.TO drawdown of -60.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGL.TO and ZGD.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGL.TO | ZGD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.53% | -60.12% | +15.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.36% | -30.15% | +10.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.36% | -30.15% | +10.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.18% | -42.75% | +20.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.72% | -51.72% | +28.00% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.55% | -21.82% | +4.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.16% | -28.33% | +10.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.95% | 11.15% | -3.20% |
Volatility
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) is 5.60%, while BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO) has a volatility of 15.73%. This indicates that CGL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZGD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGL.TO | ZGD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.60% | 15.73% | -10.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.18% | 36.41% | -13.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.88% | 45.12% | -18.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.33% | 36.41% | -18.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.41% | 37.35% | -20.94% |
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGL.TO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than ZGD.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGL.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Dividend Comparison
CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZGD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.20%.
| 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% |
ZGD.TO BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF | 0.20% | 0.22% | 0.59% | 0.76% | 0.77% | 0.38% | 0.16% | 1.20% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.32% | 0.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGL.TO and ZGD.TO have a correlation of 0.78, 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 0.60% for ZGD.TO.
CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion, while ZGD.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CGL.TO and 0.60% for ZGD.TO.
Find the right allocation for CGL.TO and ZGD.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