GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO
GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) and HCA.TO (Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X, while HCA.TO is a Canada Equities fund tracking the Solactive Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index. GLCC.TO is actively managed, while HCA.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GLCC.TO returned 20.22%/yr vs 19.13%/yr for HCA.TO. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLCC.TO charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for HCA.TO.
Performance
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLCC.TO achieves a -5.15% return, which is significantly lower than HCA.TO's 27.33% return.
GLCC.TO
- 1D
- 2.91%
- 1M
- -6.20%
- YTD
- -5.15%
- 6M
- -3.63%
- 1Y
- 48.60%
- 3Y*
- 40.00%
- 5Y*
- 20.22%
- 10Y*
- 13.89%
HCA.TO
- 1D
- 1.03%
- 1M
- 10.26%
- YTD
- 27.33%
- 6M
- 28.07%
- 1Y
- 71.89%
- 3Y*
- 34.65%
- 5Y*
- 19.13%
- 10Y*
- —
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | -5.15% | 137.43% | 20.18% | 6.19% | -1.80% | -9.38% | 15.00% | 38.71% | 17.30% |
HCA.TO Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF | 27.33% | 46.37% | 18.16% | 12.55% | -13.32% | 36.09% | 33.62% | 9.21% | -14.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLCC.TO and HCA.TO is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2018 | 0.08 |
The correlation between GLCC.TO and HCA.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GLCC.TO
HCA.TO
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
GLCC.TO
HCA.TO
-
Communication Services
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Consumer Cyclical
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Consumer Defensive
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Energy
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Financial Services
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
Healthcare
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Industrials
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Real Estate
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Technology
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
Utilities
GLCC.TO
-
HCA.TO
-
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
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO — Risk / Return Rank
GLCC.TO
HCA.TO
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) and Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF (HCA.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.
| GLCC.TO | HCA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 2.09 | -0.86 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.53 | 8.41 | -6.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.34 | 38.16 | -33.83 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -81.37%, which is greater than HCA.TO's maximum drawdown of -37.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLCC.TO and HCA.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLCC.TO | HCA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -81.37% | -37.89% | -43.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -33.03% | -8.52% | -24.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.03% | -15.16% | -17.87% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.60% | -27.63% | -9.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.83% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.04% | 0.00% | -27.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -53.15% | -7.63% | -45.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.60% | 1.87% | +9.73% |
Volatility
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Volatility Comparison
Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a higher volatility of 16.63% compared to Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF (HCA.TO) at 3.29%. This indicates that GLCC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HCA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLCC.TO | HCA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.63% | 3.29% | +13.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 35.94% | 11.18% | +24.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.26% | 13.07% | +30.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.35% | 14.09% | +18.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.16% | 22.88% | +9.28% |
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLCC.TO has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than HCA.TO's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLCC.TO vs. HCA.TO - Dividend Comparison
GLCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.12%, more than HCA.TO's 2.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | 9.12% | 6.01% | 10.30% | 11.16% | 10.08% | 6.31% | 6.47% | 4.58% | 5.62% | 7.08% | 8.75% | 2.32% |
HCA.TO Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF | 2.74% | 3.44% | 4.83% | 8.98% | 5.45% | 4.17% | 3.54% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLCC.TO and HCA.TO have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HCA.TO is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HCA.TO is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.
GLCC.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HCA.TO is Canada Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Hamilton. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for GLCC.TO and 0.45% for HCA.TO.
Find the right allocation for GLCC.TO and HCA.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