PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO

Last updated Jul 1, 2026
See Documentation

LONG.TO (CI Global Longevity Economy Fund) and CGXF.TO (CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common) are both exchange-traded funds - LONG.TO is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by CI, while CGXF.TO is a Gold fund actively managed by CI. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, LONG.TO returned 10.40%/yr vs 17.47%/yr for CGXF.TO. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Global Longevity Economy Fund (LONG.TO) and CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LONG.TO achieves a 7.64% return, which is significantly higher than CGXF.TO's -10.85% return.

LONG.TO

1D
0.82%
1M
0.20%
YTD
7.64%
6M
7.66%
1Y
21.51%
3Y*
17.35%
5Y*
10.40%
10Y*
—

CGXF.TO

1D
-0.42%
1M
-12.86%
YTD
-10.85%
6M
-11.69%
1Y
34.42%
3Y*
29.81%
5Y*
17.47%
10Y*
8.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
LONG.TO
CI Global Longevity Economy Fund		7.64%6.19%25.86%19.50%-9.01%11.77%22.32%
CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common		-10.85%114.18%11.88%1.43%1.89%-6.21%8.31%

Correlation

The correlation between LONG.TO and CGXF.TO is 0.00, 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

0.00

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

0.02

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

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2020

0.05

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

CI Global Longevity Economy Fund

CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common

Often compared with CGXF.TO:
CGXF.TO vs. CGL.TOCGXF.TO vs. CCOM.TOCGXF.TO vs. VXM-B.TOCGXF.TO vs. AGCC.TOCGXF.TO vs. CGL-C.TOCGXF.TO vs. HGGG.TOCGXF.TO vs. CMNY.TO

Return for Risk

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
LONG.TO
LONG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
LONG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LONG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
LONG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
LONG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
LONG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO
CGXF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
CGXF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGXF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Global Longevity Economy Fund (LONG.TO) and CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.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.

LONG.TOCGXF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.42
0.82

+0.60

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.99
1.26

+0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.17

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.46

1.03

+0.43

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.21

2.60

+2.61

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LONG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is higher than the CGXF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LONG.TO and CGXF.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...

Drawdowns

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LONG.TO drawdown since its inception was -23.65%, smaller than the maximum CGXF.TO drawdown of -91.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LONG.TO and CGXF.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LONG.TOCGXF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.65%

-91.79%

+68.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.39%

-33.65%

+17.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.45%

-33.65%

+11.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.65%

-37.19%

+13.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-39.68%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.91%

-31.10%

+29.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.66%

-44.90%

+39.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.58%

13.28%

-8.70%

Volatility

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI Global Longevity Economy Fund (LONG.TO) is 6.73%, while CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common (CGXF.TO) has a volatility of 15.71%. This indicates that LONG.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGXF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

LONG.TOCGXF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.73%

15.71%

-8.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.94%

34.84%

-20.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.87%

42.29%

-25.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.38%

31.50%

-14.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.72%

30.66%

-12.94%

Dividends

LONG.TO vs. CGXF.TO - Dividend Comparison

LONG.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CGXF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.05%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGXF.TO
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF Common		13.05%7.43%8.09%8.93%8.54%8.59%11.00%6.69%7.97%6.99%10.68%4.82%
LONG.TO
CI Global Longevity Economy Fund		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

LONG.TO and CGXF.TO have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LONG.TO is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while CGXF.TO is Gold.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LONG.TO and CGXF.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