HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HGGG.TO (Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF) and GLCL.TO (Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both Gold funds - HGGG.TO tracks the Solactive Global Gold Giants Index TR while GLCL.TO tracks the Mirae Asset North American Listed Gold Producers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, HGGG.TO returned 75.09% vs 75.90% for GLCL.TO. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. HGGG.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GLCL.TO.

Performance

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.TO) and Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HGGG.TO achieves a 0.08% return, which is significantly higher than GLCL.TO's -2.04% return.

HGGG.TO

• 1D: -2.10%
• 1M: 2.94%
• YTD: 0.08%
• 6M: 7.32%
• 1Y: 75.09%
• 3Y*: 48.72%
• 5Y*: 25.53%
• 10Y*: —

GLCL.TO

• 1D: -2.87%
• 1M: 2.09%
• YTD: -2.04%
• 6M: 4.37%
• 1Y: 75.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF	0.08%	100.93%
GLCL.TO Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	-2.04%	104.93%

Correlation

The correlation between HGGG.TO and GLCL.TO is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2025	0.86

The correlation between HGGG.TO and GLCL.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HGGG.TO

HGGG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 45
HGGG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
HGGG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
HGGG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 47
HGGG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
HGGG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 39

GLCL.TO

GLCL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 41
GLCL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
GLCL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
GLCL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 44
GLCL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
GLCL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.TO) and Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCL.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.

	HGGG.TO	GLCL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.69	1.49	+0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	1.90	+0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.28	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	2.19	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.11	5.74	+0.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HGGG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the GLCL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HGGG.TO and GLCL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HGGG.TO	GLCL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.69	1.49	+0.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.73	1.77	-1.04

Drawdowns

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HGGG.TO drawdown since its inception was -51.54%, which is greater than GLCL.TO's maximum drawdown of -35.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HGGG.TO and GLCL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HGGG.TO	GLCL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.54%	-35.08%	-16.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.16%	-35.08%	+3.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.16%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.96%	-29.16%	+4.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.17%	-8.45%	-11.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.00%	13.32%	-1.32%

Volatility

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.TO) is 13.86%, while Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCL.TO) has a volatility of 18.24%. This indicates that HGGG.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HGGG.TO	GLCL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.86%	18.24%	-4.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.80%	42.38%	-7.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.96%	51.33%	-7.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.54%	51.55%	-19.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.64%	51.55%	-18.91%

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HGGG.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than GLCL.TO's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

HGGG.TO vs. GLCL.TO - Dividend Comparison

HGGG.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLCL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.10%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
GLCL.TO Global X Enhanced Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	10.10%	4.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.54%	2.65%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HGGG.TO and GLCL.TO in my portfolio?

HGGG.TO and GLCL.TO have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HGGG.TO or GLCL.TO?

On fees, HGGG.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HGGG.TO or GLCL.TO?

HGGG.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GLCL.TO.

What is the main difference between HGGG.TO and GLCL.TO?

HGGG.TO tracks Solactive Global Gold Giants Index TR, while GLCL.TO tracks Mirae Asset North American Listed Gold Producers Index. They also come from different issuers: Harvest and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for HGGG.TO and 0.85% for GLCL.TO.