COW.TO vs. CGL.TO

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

COW.TO (iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF) and CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - COW.TO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Manulife Investment Management Global Agriculture Index, while CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, COW.TO returned 8.27%/yr vs 11.18%/yr for CGL.TO. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. COW.TO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL.TO.

Performance

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COW.TO achieves a 14.00% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's -0.75% return. Over the past 10 years, COW.TO has underperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 8.27%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.18% annualized return.

COW.TO

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: -0.63%
• YTD: 14.00%
• 6M: 6.80%
• 1Y: 4.28%
• 3Y*: 5.57%
• 5Y*: 3.92%
• 10Y*: 8.27%

CGL.TO

• 1D: 2.52%
• 1M: -5.26%
• YTD: -0.75%
• 6M: -0.60%
• 1Y: 22.95%
• 3Y*: 27.87%
• 5Y*: 16.95%
• 10Y*: 11.18%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
COW.TO iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF	14.00%	-4.34%	5.62%	-8.61%	12.62%	19.09%	11.78%	26.04%	-14.16%	14.90%
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	-0.75%	60.08%	25.70%	11.26%	-1.07%	-4.58%	23.41%	16.58%	-3.19%	11.68%

Correlation

The correlation between COW.TO and CGL.TO is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.03
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2010	-0.03

The correlation between COW.TO and CGL.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (10 years) to 0.07 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

COW.TO

COW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 12
COW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
COW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
COW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 12
COW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
COW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 13

CGL.TO

CGL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 24
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 28
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.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.

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.

	COW.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.27	0.83	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.51	1.21	-0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.17	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.32	0.92	-0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.78	2.64	-1.86

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.27, which is lower than the CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COW.TO and CGL.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COW.TO drawdown since its inception was -55.00%, which is greater than CGL.TO's maximum drawdown of -45.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COW.TO and CGL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	COW.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.00%	-45.96%	-9.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.43%	-24.93%	+11.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.51%	-24.93%	+10.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.84%	-24.93%	-4.91%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.38%	-24.93%	-17.45%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.04%	-20.54%	+8.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.69%	-20.30%	+5.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.51%	8.75%	-3.24%

Volatility

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) is 3.57%, while iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a volatility of 8.23%. This indicates that COW.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COW.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.57%	8.23%	-4.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.85%	24.17%	-11.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.21%	27.71%	-11.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.92%	18.58%	+0.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.84%	16.55%	+5.29%

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

COW.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than CGL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

COW.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison

COW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.16%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

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%
COW.TO iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF	2.16%	2.46%	1.43%	1.62%	2.01%	0.69%	1.13%	1.13%	1.18%	0.63%	1.21%	1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COW.TO and CGL.TO in my portfolio?

COW.TO and CGL.TO have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, COW.TO or CGL.TO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, COW.TO or CGL.TO?

CGL.TO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for COW.TO.

What is the main difference between COW.TO and CGL.TO?

COW.TO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while CGL.TO is Gold. COW.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Agriculture Index, while CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for COW.TO and 0.55% for CGL.TO.