PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
GLCC.TO vs. XYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) and XYLD (Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Global X. GLCC.TO is actively managed, while XYLD is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLCC.TO returned 13.89%/yr vs 9.28%/yr for XYLD. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLCC.TO charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for XYLD.

Performance

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) and Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

GLCC.TO is traded in CAD, while XYLD is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XYLD values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLCC.TO achieves a -5.15% return, which is significantly lower than XYLD's 6.95% return. Over the past 10 years, GLCC.TO has outperformed XYLD with an annualized return of 13.89%, while XYLD has yielded a comparatively lower 9.28% annualized 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%

XYLD

1D
0.75%
1M
3.24%
YTD
6.95%
6M
7.52%
1Y
20.24%
3Y*
12.66%
5Y*
10.77%
10Y*
9.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%-0.38%7.32%
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF		6.95%3.08%29.61%8.46%-6.48%19.53%-2.92%16.40%1.80%8.60%

Correlation

The correlation between GLCC.TO and XYLD is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.15

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.13

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2013

0.06

Over the past year, GLCC.TO and XYLD have become more correlated (0.28) than their long-term average of 0.06, meaning their price movements have been converging.

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
GLCC.TO
XYLD

Basic Materials

100.0%
1.7%

Communication Services

-

10.6%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.5%

Energy

-

3.2%

Financial Services

-

11.1%

Healthcare

-

8.3%

Industrials

-

7.8%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Technology

-

39.0%

Utilities

-

2.1%

Basic Materials

GLCC.TO
100.0%
XYLD
1.7%

Communication Services

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
10.6%

Consumer Cyclical

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
9.9%

Consumer Defensive

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
4.5%

Energy

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
3.2%

Financial Services

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
11.1%

Healthcare

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
8.3%

Industrials

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
7.8%

Real Estate

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
1.8%

Technology

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
39.0%

Utilities

GLCC.TO

-

XYLD
2.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF

Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF

Often compared with GLCC.TO:
GLCC.TO vs. AMAX.TOGLCC.TO vs. DXMO.TOGLCC.TO vs. IGLDGLCC.TO vs. GLDI.LGLCC.TO vs. BCCCGLCC.TO vs. WAF.AXGLCC.TO vs. BANK.TO
Often compared with XYLD:
XYLD vs. JEPIXYLD vs. QYLDXYLD vs. SPYXYLD vs. RYLDXYLD vs. XYLGXYLD vs. VOOXYLD vs. SCHD

Return for Risk

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
GLCC.TO
GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank
XYLD
XYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
XYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
XYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
XYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
XYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - 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 Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD). 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.TOXYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.17
2.48

-1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.59
3.75

-2.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.48

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.53

4.53

-3.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.34

17.86

-13.52

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is lower than the XYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLCC.TO and XYLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -81.37%, which is greater than XYLD's maximum drawdown of -27.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLCC.TO and XYLD.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

GLCC.TOXYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-81.37%

-27.60%

-53.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-33.03%

-4.27%

-28.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.03%

-16.88%

-16.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.60%

-16.88%

-20.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.83%

-27.60%

-17.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-27.04%

0.00%

-27.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-53.15%

-3.64%

-49.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.60%

1.08%

+10.52%

Volatility

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a higher volatility of 16.63% compared to Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD) at 2.38%. This indicates that GLCC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

GLCC.TOXYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

16.63%

2.38%

+14.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

35.94%

6.48%

+29.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

43.26%

7.78%

+35.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.35%

12.71%

+19.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.16%

15.52%

+16.64%

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLCC.TO has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than XYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLCC.TO vs. XYLD - Dividend Comparison

GLCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.12%, less than XYLD's 10.53% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF		10.53%10.51%11.54%10.51%13.43%9.07%7.93%5.76%7.12%5.18%3.23%4.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

GLCC.TO and XYLD have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.

Their fees differ too: 0.79% for GLCC.TO and 0.60% for XYLD.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GLCC.TO and XYLD

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