GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO
GBUL.TO (Ninepoint Gold Bullion Fund Series ETF) and HUG.TO (Global X Gold ETF) are both Gold funds - GBUL.TO tracks the LBMA Gold Price while HUG.TO tracks the Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Both are passively managed. GBUL.TO charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for HUG.TO.
Performance
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GBUL.TO
- 1D
- —
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HUG.TO
- 1D
- -3.59%
- 1M
- -8.22%
- YTD
- -1.46%
- 6M
- 0.86%
- 1Y
- 24.02%
- 3Y*
- 26.26%
- 5Y*
- 15.16%
- 10Y*
- 10.37%
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
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
GBUL.TO
HUG.TO
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ninepoint Gold Bullion Fund Series ETF (GBUL.TO) and Global X Gold ETF (HUG.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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GBUL.TO | HUG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 0.90 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.83 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.63 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | — | 0.39 | — |
Drawdowns
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GBUL.TO | HUG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | — | -47.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -20.89% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.89% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.06% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.66% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | — | -20.89% | — |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | — | -23.36% | — |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 8.22% | — |
Volatility
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GBUL.TO | HUG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 6.06% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 23.05% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 26.73% | — |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | — | 18.35% | — |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | — | 16.47% | — |
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
GBUL.TO has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than HUG.TO's 0.54% expense ratio.
Dividends
GBUL.TO vs. HUG.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither GBUL.TO nor HUG.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, GBUL.TO is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GBUL.TO is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for HUG.TO.
GBUL.TO tracks LBMA Gold Price, while HUG.TO tracks Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER. They also come from different issuers: Ninepoint and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for GBUL.TO and 0.54% for HUG.TO.
Find the right allocation for GBUL.TO and HUG.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