HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HUG.TO (Global X Gold ETF) and HUC.TO (Global X Crude Oil ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HUG.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while HUC.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HUG.TO returned 10.69%/yr vs 8.61%/yr for HUC.TO. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HUG.TO charges 0.54%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for HUC.TO.

Performance

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) and Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUG.TO achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than HUC.TO's 45.00% return. Over the past 10 years, HUG.TO has outperformed HUC.TO with an annualized return of 10.69%, while HUC.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 8.61% annualized return.

HUG.TO

• 1D: -1.21%
• 1M: -1.86%
• YTD: 1.43%
• 6M: 3.69%
• 1Y: 27.81%
• 3Y*: 27.56%
• 5Y*: 15.83%
• 10Y*: 10.69%

HUC.TO

• 1D: 1.46%
• 1M: -1.28%
• YTD: 45.00%
• 6M: 41.59%
• 1Y: 40.27%
• 3Y*: 12.31%
• 5Y*: 13.32%
• 10Y*: 8.61%

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

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HUG.TO Global X Gold ETF	1.43%	57.93%	24.13%	11.48%	-1.87%	-5.30%	19.82%	15.86%	-4.52%	10.34%
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF	45.00%	-13.63%	7.23%	-2.89%	26.25%	57.81%	-21.10%	19.75%	-11.68%	-3.47%

Correlation

The correlation between HUG.TO and HUC.TO is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.06
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2009	0.11

The correlation between HUG.TO and HUC.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (1 year) to 0.11 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HUG.TO	HUC.TO
Real Estate	8.8%	18.4%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HUG.TO

HUG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 28
HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
HUG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
HUG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 31
HUG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
HUG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 26

HUC.TO

HUC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 44
HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
HUC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
HUC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 46
HUC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
HUC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) and Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.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.

	HUG.TO	HUC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.06	1.60	-0.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	2.10	-0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.29	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.45	2.50	-1.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.47	4.94	-1.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.06, which is lower than the HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUG.TO and HUC.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

	HUG.TO	HUC.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.06	1.60	-0.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87	0.48	+0.39
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.65	0.30	+0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.13	+0.30

Drawdowns

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUG.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.99%, smaller than the maximum HUC.TO drawdown of -76.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUG.TO and HUC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HUG.TO	HUC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.99%	-76.99%	+29.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.27%	-16.20%	-3.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.27%	-23.83%	+4.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.06%	-30.83%	+8.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.66%	-61.56%	+36.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.57%	-2.80%	-15.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.96%	-34.61%	+11.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.03%	8.17%	-0.14%

Volatility

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) is 5.89%, while Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) has a volatility of 11.26%. This indicates that HUG.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HUC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HUG.TO	HUC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.89%	11.26%	-5.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.75%	21.17%	+1.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.49%	25.36%	+1.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.25%	27.85%	-9.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.41%	29.04%	-12.63%

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HUG.TO has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than HUC.TO's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

HUG.TO vs. HUC.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither HUG.TO nor HUC.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HUG.TO and HUC.TO in my portfolio?

HUG.TO and HUC.TO have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HUG.TO or HUC.TO?

On fees, HUG.TO is cheaper at 0.54% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HUG.TO or HUC.TO?

HUG.TO is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for HUC.TO.

What is the main difference between HUG.TO and HUC.TO?

HUG.TO is categorized as Gold, while HUC.TO is Commodities. HUG.TO tracks Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while HUC.TO tracks Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for HUG.TO and 1.09% for HUC.TO.