PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

MFC.TO (Manulife Financial Corporation) is a stock, while CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) is Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion. Over the past 10 years, MFC.TO returned 17.33%/yr vs 10.99%/yr for CGL.TO. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions.

Performance

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Manulife Financial Corporation (MFC.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFC.TO achieves a 15.19% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's -3.19% return. Over the past 10 years, MFC.TO has outperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 17.33%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 10.99% annualized return.

MFC.TO

1D
1.53%
1M
9.90%
YTD
15.19%
6M
17.52%
1Y
38.24%
3Y*
35.54%
5Y*
23.66%
10Y*
17.33%

CGL.TO

1D
0.25%
1M
-9.62%
YTD
-3.19%
6M
-3.25%
1Y
19.93%
3Y*
27.16%
5Y*
15.73%
10Y*
10.99%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MFC.TO
Manulife Financial Corporation		15.19%17.45%57.53%28.33%5.83%11.57%-9.19%41.99%-23.25%13.30%
CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)		-3.19%60.08%25.70%11.26%-1.07%-4.58%23.41%16.58%-3.19%11.68%

Correlation

The correlation between MFC.TO and CGL.TO is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.13

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

0.07

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

0.07

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

-0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2010

-0.07

The correlation between MFC.TO and CGL.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (10 years) to 0.13 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Manulife Financial Corporation

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with MFC.TO:
MFC.TO vs. SLF.TOMFC.TO vs. GWO.TOMFC.TO vs. MFCMFC.TO vs. POW.TOMFC.TO vs. BNS.TOMFC.TO vs. IAG.TOMFC.TO vs. VDY.TO
Often compared with CGL.TO:
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TOCGL.TO vs. XGD.TOCGL.TO vs. KILO.TOCGL.TO vs. MNT.TOCGL.TO vs. GLDMCGL.TO vs. VOOCGL.TO vs. SVR.TO

Return for Risk

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MFC.TO
MFC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
MFC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MFC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
MFC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
MFC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
MFC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
CGL.TO
CGL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Manulife Financial Corporation (MFC.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.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.

MFC.TOCGL.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.71
0.78

+0.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.19
1.15

+1.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.16

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.67

0.87

+1.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.65

2.49

+6.16

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFC.TO and CGL.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

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFC.TO drawdown since its inception was -77.97%, which is greater than CGL.TO's maximum drawdown of -45.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFC.TO and CGL.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MFC.TOCGL.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.97%

-45.96%

-32.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.71%

-24.93%

+12.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.63%

-24.93%

+7.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.05%

-24.93%

+3.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.68%

-24.93%

-27.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-22.50%

+22.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.15%

-20.30%

-7.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.96%

8.66%

-4.70%

Volatility

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison

Manulife Financial Corporation (MFC.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) have volatilities of 7.81% and 7.67%, 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MFC.TOCGL.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.81%

7.67%

+0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.42%

24.08%

-8.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.91%

27.61%

-7.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.55%

18.54%

+3.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.09%

16.53%

+9.56%

Dividends

MFC.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison

MFC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.28%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MFC.TO
Manulife Financial Corporation		3.28%3.53%3.62%4.99%5.47%4.85%4.94%3.79%4.70%3.13%3.09%2.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

MFC.TO and CGL.TO have a correlation of 0.13, 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 MFC.TO and CGL.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