HUG.TO vs. PHYS.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) and Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO).

HUG.TO is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER. It was launched on Jun 24, 2009.

Performance

HUG.TO vs. PHYS.TO - Performance Comparison

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HUG.TO Global X Gold ETF	7.30%	57.93%	24.13%	11.48%	-1.87%	-5.30%	19.82%	15.86%	-6.40%
PHYS.TO Sprott Physical Gold Trust	9.00%	56.35%	37.41%	10.65%	4.96%	-5.37%	21.38%	12.13%	4.21%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUG.TO achieves a 7.30% return, which is significantly lower than PHYS.TO's 9.00% return.

HUG.TO

• 1D: 3.60%
• 1M: -11.44%
• YTD: 7.30%
• 6M: 18.79%
• 1Y: 43.53%
• 3Y*: 29.54%
• 5Y*: 19.17%
• 10Y*: 11.28%

PHYS.TO

• 1D: 3.83%
• 1M: -9.76%
• YTD: 9.00%
• 6M: 19.82%
• 1Y: 42.70%
• 3Y*: 33.20%
• 5Y*: 23.79%
• 10Y*: —

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

Return for Risk

HUG.TO vs. PHYS.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: 80
HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
HUG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
HUG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 78
HUG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
HUG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 79

PHYS.TO

PHYS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 84
PHYS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
PHYS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
PHYS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 83
PHYS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PHYS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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. PHYS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) and Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.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	PHYS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	1.60	-0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.02	2.00	+0.02
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.30	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	2.47	-0.10
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.51	8.74	-0.23
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. PHYS.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the PHYS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUG.TO and PHYS.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HUG.TO	PHYS.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.58	1.60	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.07	1.42	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.64	-0.18

Correlation

The correlation between HUG.TO and PHYS.TO is 0.73, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

HUG.TO vs. PHYS.TO - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

HUG.TO vs. PHYS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUG.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.99%, which is greater than PHYS.TO's maximum drawdown of -27.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUG.TO and PHYS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HUG.TO	PHYS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.99%	-27.08%	-20.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.27%	-18.14%	-1.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.06%	-18.14%	-3.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.85%	-11.31%	-2.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.04%	-7.72%	-15.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.35%	5.12%	+0.23%

Volatility

HUG.TO vs. PHYS.TO - Volatility Comparison

Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO) and Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) have volatilities of 10.58% and 10.99%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HUG.TO	PHYS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.58%	10.99%	-0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.01%	23.94%	+0.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.70%	26.89%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.97%	16.92%	+1.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.38%	26.95%	-10.57%