NCIQ vs. CEF.TO
NCIQ (Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF) is Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Nasdaq Crypto US Settlement Price™ Index, while CEF.TO (Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust) is a stock. Over the past year, NCIQ returned -40.00% vs 57.75% for CEF.TO. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
NCIQ is traded in USD, while CEF.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CEF.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NCIQ achieves a -28.25% return, which is significantly lower than CEF.TO's 3.07% return.
NCIQ
- 1D
- -2.92%
- 1M
- -18.28%
- YTD
- -28.25%
- 6M
- -33.10%
- 1Y
- -40.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CEF.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.95%
- YTD
- 3.07%
- 6M
- 12.24%
- 1Y
- 57.75%
- 3Y*
- 36.41%
- 5Y*
- 18.75%
- 10Y*
- 14.00%
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NCIQ Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF | -28.25% | -10.21% |
CEF.TO Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust | 1.26% | 72.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between NCIQ and CEF.TO is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2025 | 0.15 |
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
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
NCIQ
CEF.TO
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (NCIQ) and Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF.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.
| NCIQ | CEF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 1.30 | -0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.76 | 2.14 | -2.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.29 | 5.46 | -6.75 |
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
| NCIQ | CEF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.85 | 1.54 | -2.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.77 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.63 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.61 | 0.36 | -0.96 |
Drawdowns
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NCIQ drawdown since its inception was -52.90%, smaller than the maximum CEF.TO drawdown of -62.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NCIQ and CEF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NCIQ | CEF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.90% | -62.33% | +9.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -52.90% | -27.11% | -25.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -27.11% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.11% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -29.33% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -52.01% | -20.69% | -31.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.86% | -31.26% | +9.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 30.94% | 10.61% | +20.33% |
Volatility
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (NCIQ) is 9.56%, while Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF.TO) has a volatility of 10.31%. This indicates that NCIQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CEF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NCIQ | CEF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.56% | 10.31% | -0.75% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.46% | 35.20% | +1.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 47.21% | 37.80% | +9.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.80% | 24.44% | +23.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 47.80% | 22.54% | +25.26% |
Dividends
NCIQ vs. CEF.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither NCIQ nor CEF.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEF.TO Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.08% | 0.09% | 0.09% |
NCIQ Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US 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
NCIQ and CEF.TO have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Find the right allocation for NCIQ and CEF.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