EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EQX.TO (Equinox Gold Corp.) is a stock, while AMAX.TO (Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF) is Gold fund actively managed by Hamilton Capital. Over the past year, EQX.TO returned 65.42% vs 38.97% for AMAX.TO. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.

Performance

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Equinox Gold Corp. (EQX.TO) and Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (AMAX.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQX.TO achieves a -23.42% return, which is significantly lower than AMAX.TO's -6.85% return.

EQX.TO

• 1D: 2.93%
• 1M: -25.84%
• YTD: -23.42%
• 6M: -26.98%
• 1Y: 65.42%
• 3Y*: 33.49%
• 5Y*: 6.41%
• 10Y*: 8.39%

AMAX.TO

• 1D: 2.88%
• 1M: -14.62%
• YTD: -6.85%
• 6M: -6.33%
• 1Y: 38.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EQX.TO Equinox Gold Corp.	-23.42%	166.44%	20.47%
AMAX.TO Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF	-6.85%	113.24%	27.49%

Correlation

The correlation between EQX.TO and AMAX.TO is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2024	0.78

The correlation between EQX.TO and AMAX.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQX.TO

EQX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 72
EQX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
EQX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
EQX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 70
EQX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
EQX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 74

AMAX.TO

AMAX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 29
AMAX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
AMAX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
AMAX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 32
AMAX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
AMAX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Equinox Gold Corp. (EQX.TO) and Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (AMAX.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.

	EQX.TO	AMAX.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.11	0.95	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	1.37	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.19	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.40	1.20	+0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.22	3.31	+0.91

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQX.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is comparable to the AMAX.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQX.TO and AMAX.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

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQX.TO drawdown since its inception was -81.51%, which is greater than AMAX.TO's maximum drawdown of -32.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQX.TO and AMAX.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	EQX.TO	AMAX.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-81.51%	-32.73%	-48.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-46.96%	-32.73%	-14.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.96%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.34%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-80.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.34%	-27.46%	-14.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-52.58%	-6.04%	-46.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.63%	11.81%	+3.82%

Volatility

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Volatility Comparison

Equinox Gold Corp. (EQX.TO) has a higher volatility of 22.49% compared to Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (AMAX.TO) at 15.60%. This indicates that EQX.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AMAX.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EQX.TO	AMAX.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.49%	15.60%	+6.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	47.50%	34.56%	+12.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	59.73%	41.42%	+18.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	56.04%	34.50%	+21.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	56.51%	34.50%	+22.01%

Dividends

EQX.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Dividend Comparison

EQX.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%, less than AMAX.TO's 9.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
AMAX.TO Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF	9.56%	6.96%	9.67%
EQX.TO Equinox Gold Corp.	0.28%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EQX.TO and AMAX.TO in my portfolio?

EQX.TO and AMAX.TO have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.