MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO
MNS.TO (Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves) and AGCC.TO (Global X Silver Covered Call ETF) are both Silver funds. MNS.TO is passively managed, while AGCC.TO is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MNS.TO charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for AGCC.TO.
Performance
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MNS.TO achieves a -8.40% return, which is significantly lower than AGCC.TO's 1.95% return.
MNS.TO
- 1D
- -2.02%
- 1M
- 1.76%
- YTD
- -8.40%
- 6M
- 21.27%
- 1Y
- 101.71%
- 3Y*
- 47.34%
- 5Y*
- 23.26%
- 10Y*
- 16.17%
AGCC.TO
- 1D
- -2.45%
- 1M
- 1.43%
- YTD
- 1.95%
- 6M
- 19.93%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MNS.TO Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves | -8.40% | 53.82% |
AGCC.TO Global X Silver Covered Call ETF | 1.95% | 37.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between MNS.TO and AGCC.TO is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 9, 2025 | 0.89 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
MNS.TO
AGCC.TO
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves (MNS.TO) and Global X Silver Covered Call ETF (AGCC.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.
| MNS.TO | AGCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.67 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.94 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MNS.TO | AGCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 1.06 | -0.77 |
Drawdowns
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -51.12%, which is greater than AGCC.TO's maximum drawdown of -39.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNS.TO and AGCC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MNS.TO | AGCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.12% | -39.17% | -11.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -38.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.98% | -32.43% | +0.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.15% | -16.63% | -11.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.19% | — | — |
Volatility
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MNS.TO | AGCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.55% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 52.13% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 54.03% | 64.60% | -10.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.67% | 64.60% | -29.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.05% | 64.60% | -32.55% |
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MNS.TO has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than AGCC.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
MNS.TO vs. AGCC.TO - Dividend Comparison
MNS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AGCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.55%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
AGCC.TO Global X Silver Covered Call ETF | 5.55% | 1.49% |
MNS.TO Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MNS.TO and AGCC.TO have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MNS.TO is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MNS.TO is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for AGCC.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Royal Canadian Mint and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MNS.TO and 0.60% for AGCC.TO.
Find the right allocation for MNS.TO and AGCC.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