PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MA vs. CGL-C.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MA vs. CGL-C.TO

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

MA (Mastercard Incorporated) is a stock, while CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) is Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price (CAD). Over the past 10 years, MA returned 18.76%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for CGL-C.TO. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions.

Performance

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Mastercard Incorporated (MA) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

MA is traded in USD, while CGL-C.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CGL-C.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MA achieves a -13.78% return, which is significantly lower than CGL-C.TO's -0.02% return. Over the past 10 years, MA has outperformed CGL-C.TO with an annualized return of 18.76%, while CGL-C.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 12.13% annualized return.

MA

1D
0.13%
1M
-0.72%
YTD
-13.78%
6M
-13.51%
1Y
-12.19%
3Y*
9.87%
5Y*
6.78%
10Y*
18.76%

CGL-C.TO

1D
2.63%
1M
-5.00%
YTD
-0.02%
6M
0.27%
1Y
25.26%
3Y*
29.60%
5Y*
17.95%
10Y*
12.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MA
Mastercard Incorporated		-13.78%9.04%24.17%23.40%-2.66%1.16%20.19%59.16%25.31%47.69%
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF		-0.02%62.99%26.68%12.82%-0.22%-4.80%24.71%16.80%-1.43%11.88%

Correlation

The correlation between MA and CGL-C.TO is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

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

-0.11

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

-0.03

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

-0.08

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

-0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2012

-0.12

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Mastercard Incorporated

iShares Gold Bullion ETF

Often compared with MA:
MA vs. VMA vs. AXPMA vs. SPYMA vs. MSFTMA vs. MCDMA vs. BRK-BMA vs. COST
Often compared with CGL-C.TO:
CGL-C.TO vs. CGL.TOCGL-C.TO vs. MNT.TOCGL-C.TO vs. GLDCGL-C.TO vs. PHYS.TOCGL-C.TO vs. ZGLD.TOCGL-C.TO vs. ABX.TOCGL-C.TO vs. XMD.TO

Return for Risk

MA vs. CGL-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MA
MA Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
MA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
MA Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
MA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
MA Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO
CGL-C.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mastercard Incorporated (MA) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.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.

MACGL-C.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.56
0.95

-1.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-0.65
1.34

-1.98

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.92

1.20

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.58

1.04

-1.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.18

3.00

-4.18

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MA Sharpe Ratio is -0.56, which is lower than the CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MA and CGL-C.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

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MA drawdown since its inception was -62.67%, which is greater than CGL-C.TO's maximum drawdown of -42.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MA and CGL-C.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MACGL-C.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.67%

-42.11%

-20.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.91%

-24.32%

+3.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.91%

-24.32%

+3.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.25%

-24.32%

-3.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.00%

-24.32%

-16.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.71%

-19.73%

+2.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.83%

-18.51%

+8.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.38%

8.46%

+1.92%

Volatility

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Mastercard Incorporated (MA) is 6.46%, while iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a volatility of 8.18%. This indicates that MA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGL-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MACGL-C.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.46%

8.18%

-1.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.91%

23.01%

-6.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.90%

26.82%

-4.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.02%

18.25%

+5.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.93%

16.75%

+10.18%

Dividends

MA vs. CGL-C.TO - Dividend Comparison

MA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, while CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGL-C.TO
iShares Gold Bullion 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%
MA
Mastercard Incorporated		0.66%0.53%0.50%0.53%0.56%0.49%0.45%0.44%0.53%0.58%0.74%0.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

MA and CGL-C.TO have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MA and CGL-C.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