GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO
GLCL.TO (Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) and AMAX.TO (Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF) are both Gold funds. GLCL.TO is passively managed, while AMAX.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, GLCL.TO returned 75.90% vs 47.98% for AMAX.TO. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLCL.TO charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for AMAX.TO.
Performance
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLCL.TO achieves a -2.04% return, which is significantly lower than AMAX.TO's -1.05% return.
GLCL.TO
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- 2.09%
- YTD
- -2.04%
- 6M
- 4.37%
- 1Y
- 75.90%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AMAX.TO
- 1D
- -2.52%
- 1M
- 2.42%
- YTD
- -1.05%
- 6M
- 3.19%
- 1Y
- 47.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GLCL.TO Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | -2.04% | 104.93% |
AMAX.TO Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF | -1.05% | 62.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLCL.TO and AMAX.TO is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2025 | 0.94 |
The correlation between GLCL.TO and AMAX.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO — Risk / Return Rank
GLCL.TO
AMAX.TO
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCL.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.
| GLCL.TO | AMAX.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.23 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.19 | 1.69 | +0.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.74 | 4.44 | +1.29 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLCL.TO | AMAX.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.49 | 1.21 | +0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.77 | 1.62 | +0.15 |
Drawdowns
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLCL.TO drawdown since its inception was -35.08%, which is greater than AMAX.TO's maximum drawdown of -28.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLCL.TO and AMAX.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLCL.TO | AMAX.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.08% | -28.60% | -6.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.08% | -28.60% | -6.48% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -29.16% | -22.95% | -6.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.45% | -5.70% | -2.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.32% | 10.83% | +2.49% |
Volatility
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Volatility Comparison
Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCL.TO) has a higher volatility of 18.24% compared to Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (AMAX.TO) at 14.22%. This indicates that GLCL.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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLCL.TO | AMAX.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.24% | 14.22% | +4.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 42.38% | 32.92% | +9.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 51.33% | 39.98% | +11.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 51.55% | 33.96% | +17.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 51.55% | 33.96% | +17.59% |
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLCL.TO has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than AMAX.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLCL.TO vs. AMAX.TO - Dividend Comparison
GLCL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.10%, more than AMAX.TO's 9.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
AMAX.TO Hamilton Gold Producer YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF | 9.00% | 7.11% | 11.22% |
GLCL.TO Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | 10.10% | 4.34% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, GLCL.TO and AMAX.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, AMAX.TO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AMAX.TO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GLCL.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Hamilton Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GLCL.TO and 0.65% for AMAX.TO.
Find the right allocation for GLCL.TO and AMAX.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