PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HXS.TO vs. GLCC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HXS.TO vs. GLCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HXS.TO (Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HXS.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while GLCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. HXS.TO is passively managed, while GLCC.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, HXS.TO returned 15.90%/yr vs 14.52%/yr for GLCC.TO. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HXS.TO charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLCC.TO.

Performance

HXS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF (HXS.TO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HXS.TO achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's -0.45% return. Over the past 10 years, HXS.TO has outperformed GLCC.TO with an annualized return of 15.90%, while GLCC.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 14.52% annualized return.

HXS.TO

1D
-0.27%
1M
7.20%
YTD
11.99%
6M
10.17%
1Y
29.00%
3Y*
23.29%
5Y*
16.64%
10Y*
15.90%

GLCC.TO

1D
-2.75%
1M
1.61%
YTD
-0.45%
6M
4.96%
1Y
60.20%
3Y*
40.99%
5Y*
21.30%
10Y*
14.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HXS.TO
Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF		11.99%11.93%34.98%23.22%-12.72%27.30%15.78%24.69%3.03%13.60%
GLCC.TO
Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF		-0.45%137.43%20.18%6.19%-1.80%-9.37%15.00%38.72%-0.38%7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between HXS.TO and GLCC.TO is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.22

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.14

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.10

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2011

0.03

The correlation between HXS.TO and GLCC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.02 (10 years) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
HXS.TO
GLCC.TO

Technology

35.6%

-

Financial Services

11.8%

-

Communication Services

11.2%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%

-

Healthcare

8.5%

-

Industrials

8.3%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.9%

-

Energy

3.5%

-

Utilities

2.4%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Basic Materials

1.8%
100.0%

Technology

HXS.TO
35.6%
GLCC.TO

-

Financial Services

HXS.TO
11.8%
GLCC.TO

-

Communication Services

HXS.TO
11.2%
GLCC.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

HXS.TO
10.1%
GLCC.TO

-

Healthcare

HXS.TO
8.5%
GLCC.TO

-

Industrials

HXS.TO
8.3%
GLCC.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

HXS.TO
4.9%
GLCC.TO

-

Energy

HXS.TO
3.5%
GLCC.TO

-

Utilities

HXS.TO
2.4%
GLCC.TO

-

Real Estate

HXS.TO
1.9%
GLCC.TO

-

Basic Materials

HXS.TO
1.8%
GLCC.TO
100.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF

Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF

Often compared with HXS.TO:
HXS.TO vs. HXQ.TOHXS.TO vs. VFV.TOHXS.TO vs. ZSP.TOHXS.TO vs. VOOHXS.TO vs. XUS.TOHXS.TO vs. SPYHXS.TO vs. TEC.TO
Often compared with GLCC.TO:
GLCC.TO vs. AMAX.TOGLCC.TO vs. DXMO.TOGLCC.TO vs. IGLDGLCC.TO vs. GLDI.LGLCC.TO vs. BCCCGLCC.TO vs. WAF.AXGLCC.TO vs. 4GLD.DE

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HXS.TO
HXS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
HXS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HXS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
HXS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
HXS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
HXS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO
GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF (HXS.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.

HXS.TOGLCC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.46
1.45

+1.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.36
1.86

+1.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.27

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.33

2.10

+1.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.62

5.69

+6.93

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current HXS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is higher than the GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HXS.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

HXS.TOGLCC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.46

1.45

+1.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.11

0.67

+0.44

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.97

0.46

+0.51

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.02

0.00

+1.02

Drawdowns

HXS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HXS.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.42%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -71.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HXS.TO and GLCC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HXS.TOGLCC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.42%

-71.12%

+43.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.74%

-28.86%

+20.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.98%

-28.86%

+9.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.63%

-37.60%

+14.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.42%

-44.83%

+17.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.27%

-23.43%

+23.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.54%

-34.43%

+30.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.30%

10.61%

-8.31%

Volatility

HXS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF (HXS.TO) is 3.27%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 14.96%. This indicates that HXS.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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HXS.TOGLCC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.27%

14.96%

-11.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.83%

34.13%

-25.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.85%

41.70%

-29.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.13%

31.94%

-16.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.53%

31.95%

-15.42%

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

HXS.TO has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than GLCC.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

HXS.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

HXS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.69%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GLCC.TO
Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF		8.69%6.01%10.30%11.16%10.08%6.31%6.47%4.58%5.62%7.09%9.21%11.63%
HXS.TO
Global X S&P 500 Index Corporate Class ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

HXS.TO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HXS.TO is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HXS.TO is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.

HXS.TO is categorized as S&P 500, while GLCC.TO is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for HXS.TO and 0.79% for GLCC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HXS.TO and GLCC.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