PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO).

CGXF.TO and ZGD.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CGXF.TO is an actively managed fund by CI. It was launched on Mar 3, 2022. ZGD.TO is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. It was launched on Nov 14, 2012.

Performance

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common		6.89%114.19%11.88%1.43%1.89%-6.21%15.23%20.53%-18.76%5.51%
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF		11.73%170.64%37.48%10.17%-2.30%-12.57%26.59%53.72%-12.09%-0.73%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGXF.TO achieves a 6.89% return, which is significantly lower than ZGD.TO's 11.73% return. Over the past 10 years, CGXF.TO has underperformed ZGD.TO with an annualized return of 13.49%, while ZGD.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 21.57% annualized return.

CGXF.TO

1D
6.44%
1M
-17.38%
YTD
6.89%
6M
18.28%
1Y
70.32%
3Y*
34.03%
5Y*
21.17%
10Y*
13.49%

ZGD.TO

1D
7.87%
1M
-18.70%
YTD
11.73%
6M
31.71%
1Y
123.98%
3Y*
57.32%
5Y*
35.00%
10Y*
21.57%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common

BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF

Often compared with CGXF.TO:
CGXF.TO vs. CCOM.TOCGXF.TO vs. CMNY.TOCGXF.TO vs. HGGG.TOCGXF.TO vs. GDMNCGXF.TO vs. VXM-B.TOCGXF.TO vs. CGL.TOCGXF.TO vs. SBT.TO
Often compared with ZGD.TO:
ZGD.TO vs. XGD.TOZGD.TO vs. GLDZGD.TO vs. AMAX.TOZGD.TO vs. GDXUZGD.TO vs. SGDMZGD.TO vs. ZEB.TOZGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGXF.TO has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than ZGD.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.

CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF

Return for Risk

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CGXF.TO
CGXF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
CGXF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO
ZGD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.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.

CGXF.TOZGD.TODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.78

2.75

-0.98

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.14

2.86

-0.72

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.43

-0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.64

4.17

-1.53

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.78

15.14

-5.36

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

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGXF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is lower than the ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGXF.TO and ZGD.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CGXF.TOZGD.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.78

2.75

-0.98

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.71

0.98

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

0.58

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.06

0.30

-0.25

Correlation

The correlation between CGXF.TO and ZGD.TO is 0.71, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGXF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.53%, more than ZGD.TO's 0.20% yield.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common		9.53%7.43%8.09%8.92%8.54%8.59%11.01%6.69%7.97%6.99%10.68%11.75%
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%

Drawdowns

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGXF.TO drawdown since its inception was -88.66%, which is greater than ZGD.TO's maximum drawdown of -60.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGXF.TO and ZGD.TO.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

CGXF.TOZGD.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-88.66%

-60.12%

-28.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.39%

-30.15%

+2.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.19%

-42.75%

+5.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.68%

-51.72%

+12.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.38%

-18.77%

+1.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.85%

-28.47%

-2.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.40%

8.30%

-0.90%

Volatility

CGXF.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO) is 16.05%, while BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO) has a volatility of 18.29%. This indicates that CGXF.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 graphics...

Volatility by Period

CGXF.TOZGD.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

16.05%

18.29%

-2.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.80%

37.55%

-4.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

39.76%

45.29%

-5.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.17%

35.83%

-5.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.09%

37.54%

-7.45%