PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CGXF.TO vs. ZGLD.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO) and BMO Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units) (ZGLD.TO).

CGXF.TO and ZGLD.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. ZGLD.TO is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the Gold Bullion. It was launched on Mar 8, 2024.

Performance

CGXF.TO vs. ZGLD.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 Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units) (ZGLD.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

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

2026 (YTD)20252024
CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common		6.89%114.19%20.44%
ZGLD.TO
BMO Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units)		10.24%55.82%28.23%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGXF.TO achieves a 6.89% return, which is significantly lower than ZGLD.TO's 10.24% 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%

ZGLD.TO

1D
3.69%
1M
-9.21%
YTD
10.24%
6M
21.20%
1Y
44.65%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*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 Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units)

Often compared with CGXF.TO:
CGXF.TO vs. CCOM.TOCGXF.TO vs. HGGG.TOCGXF.TO vs. CMNY.TOCGXF.TO vs. VXM-B.TOCGXF.TO vs. CGL.TOCGXF.TO vs. GDMNCGXF.TO vs. SBT.TO
Often compared with ZGLD.TO:
ZGLD.TO vs. CGL-C.TOZGLD.TO vs. KILO.TOZGLD.TO vs. MNT.TOZGLD.TO vs. PHYS.TOZGLD.TO vs. XGD.TOZGLD.TO vs. XEQT.TOZGLD.TO vs. VALT.TO

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

CGXF.TO has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than ZGLD.TO's 0.23% expense ratio.

CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common
ZGLD.TO
BMO Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units)

Return for Risk

CGXF.TO vs. ZGLD.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
ZGLD.TO
ZGLD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
ZGLD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGLD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGLD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGLD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGLD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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. ZGLD.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 Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units) (ZGLD.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.TOZGLD.TODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.78

1.73

+0.05

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.14

2.20

-0.06

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.33

-0.01

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.64

2.75

-0.11

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.78

9.61

+0.17

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. ZGLD.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGXF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is comparable to the ZGLD.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGXF.TO and ZGLD.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.TOZGLD.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.78

1.73

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.71

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.06

2.28

-2.22

Correlation

The correlation between CGXF.TO and ZGLD.TO is 0.69, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

CGXF.TO vs. ZGLD.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGXF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.53%, while ZGLD.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

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%
ZGLD.TO
BMO Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

CGXF.TO vs. ZGLD.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGXF.TO drawdown since its inception was -88.66%, which is greater than ZGLD.TO's maximum drawdown of -17.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGXF.TO and ZGLD.TO.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

CGXF.TOZGLD.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-88.66%

-17.23%

-71.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.39%

-17.23%

-10.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.19%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.68%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.38%

-10.60%

-6.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.85%

-2.59%

-28.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.40%

4.94%

+2.46%

Volatility

CGXF.TO vs. ZGLD.TO - Volatility Comparison

CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO) has a higher volatility of 16.05% compared to BMO Gold Bullion ETF (CAD Units) (ZGLD.TO) at 10.81%. This indicates that CGXF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZGLD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period

CGXF.TOZGLD.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

16.05%

10.81%

+5.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.80%

22.99%

+9.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

39.76%

26.02%

+13.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.17%

20.69%

+9.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.09%

20.69%

+9.40%