HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

HUTS.TO (Hamilton Enhanced Utilities ETF) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HUTS.TO is a Utilities Equities fund tracking the Solactive Canadian Utility Services High Dividend Index TR, while GLCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. HUTS.TO is passively managed, while GLCC.TO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HUTS.TO returned 14.74%/yr vs 40.00%/yr for GLCC.TO. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HUTS.TO charges 2.06%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLCC.TO.

Performance

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUTS.TO achieves a 20.32% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's -5.15% return.

HUTS.TO

• 1D: -0.73%
• 1M: 4.35%
• YTD: 20.32%
• 6M: 21.83%
• 1Y: 35.24%
• 3Y*: 14.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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%

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

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
HUTS.TO Hamilton Enhanced Utilities ETF	20.32%	21.29%	9.40%	-3.91%	-12.96%
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	-5.15%	137.43%	20.18%	6.19%	25.44%

Correlation

The correlation between HUTS.TO and GLCC.TO is -0.01, 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	-0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2022	0.21

The correlation between HUTS.TO and GLCC.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HUTS.TO	GLCC.TO
Utilities	41.3%	-
Energy	35.1%	-
Communication Services	23.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	100.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HUTS.TO

HUTS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 94
HUTS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
HUTS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
HUTS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 95
HUTS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
HUTS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 91

GLCC.TO

GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 35
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 37
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
GLCC.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.

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hamilton Enhanced Utilities ETF (HUTS.TO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.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.

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.

	HUTS.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.70	1.17	+2.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.25	1.59	+3.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.68	1.23	+0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.06	1.53	+4.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.00	4.34	+14.66

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUTS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.70, which is higher than the GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUTS.TO and GLCC.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.

Drawdowns

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUTS.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.57%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -81.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUTS.TO and GLCC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HUTS.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.57%	-81.37%	+50.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.84%	-33.03%	+27.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.25%	-33.03%	+12.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-37.60%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.73%	-27.04%	+26.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.99%	-53.15%	+43.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.86%	11.60%	-9.74%

Volatility

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Hamilton Enhanced Utilities ETF (HUTS.TO) is 3.41%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 16.63%. This indicates that HUTS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HUTS.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.41%	16.63%	-13.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.73%	35.94%	-28.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.58%	43.26%	-33.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.98%	32.35%	-17.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.98%	32.16%	-17.18%

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HUTS.TO has a 2.06% expense ratio, which is higher than GLCC.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

HUTS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

HUTS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.43%, less than GLCC.TO's 9.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
HUTS.TO Hamilton Enhanced Utilities ETF	5.43%	6.45%	7.45%	7.83%	2.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HUTS.TO and GLCC.TO in my portfolio?

HUTS.TO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HUTS.TO or GLCC.TO?

On fees, GLCC.TO is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HUTS.TO or GLCC.TO?

GLCC.TO is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 2.06% for HUTS.TO.

What is the main difference between HUTS.TO and GLCC.TO?

HUTS.TO is categorized as Utilities Equities, while GLCC.TO is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Hamilton and Global X. Their fees differ too: 2.06% for HUTS.TO and 0.79% for GLCC.TO.