PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PRA.TO (Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PRA.TO is a fund fund, while GLCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. Over the past 10 years, PRA.TO returned 10.80%/yr vs 14.52%/yr for GLCC.TO. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund (PRA.TO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRA.TO achieves a 24.32% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's -0.45% return. Over the past 10 years, PRA.TO has underperformed GLCC.TO with an annualized return of 10.80%, while GLCC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 14.52% annualized return.

PRA.TO

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: 0.83%
• YTD: 24.32%
• 6M: 24.16%
• 1Y: 42.26%
• 3Y*: 19.55%
• 5Y*: 15.00%
• 10Y*: 10.80%

GLCC.TO

• 1D: -2.75%
• 1M: 1.61%
• YTD: -0.45%
• 6M: 4.96%
• 1Y: 60.20%
• 3Y*: 40.99%
• 5Y*: 21.30%
• 10Y*: 14.52%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PRA.TO Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund	24.32%	18.21%	8.78%	2.07%	15.88%	23.55%	5.06%	14.16%	-7.41%	3.51%
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	-0.45%	137.43%	20.18%	6.19%	-1.80%	-9.37%	15.00%	38.72%	-0.38%	7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between PRA.TO and GLCC.TO is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 9, 2013	0.22

Over the past year, PRA.TO and GLCC.TO have become more correlated (0.47) than their long-term average of 0.22, meaning their price movements have been converging.

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PRA.TO	GLCC.TO
Basic Materials	35.8%	100.0%
Energy	20.4%	-
Utilities	16.7%	-
Real Estate	15.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	10.8%	-
Industrials	1.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

PRA.TO

PRA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 94
PRA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
PRA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
PRA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 91
PRA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
PRA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

GLCC.TO

GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 39
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 40
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
GLCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund (PRA.TO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.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.

	PRA.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.43	1.45	+1.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.58	1.86	+2.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.27	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	13.02	2.10	+10.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	36.59	5.69	+30.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.43, which is higher than the GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRA.TO and GLCC.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PRA.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.43	1.45	+1.98
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.12	0.67	+0.45
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75	0.46	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	0.00	+0.55

Drawdowns

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRA.TO drawdown since its inception was -34.43%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -71.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRA.TO and GLCC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PRA.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.43%	-71.12%	+36.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.26%	-28.86%	+25.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.47%	-28.86%	+15.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.37%	-37.60%	+18.23%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.26%	-44.83%	+12.57%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.78%	-23.43%	+21.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.71%	-34.43%	+26.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.16%	10.61%	-9.45%

Volatility

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund (PRA.TO) is 3.79%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 14.96%. This indicates that PRA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PRA.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.79%	14.96%	-11.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.45%	34.13%	-24.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.40%	41.70%	-29.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.47%	31.94%	-18.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.41%	31.95%	-17.54%

Dividends

PRA.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

PRA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.09%, less than GLCC.TO's 8.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	8.69%	6.01%	10.30%	11.16%	10.08%	6.31%	6.47%	4.58%	5.62%	7.09%	9.21%	11.63%
PRA.TO Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund	2.09%	3.23%	2.95%	3.12%	1.93%	1.25%	1.52%	1.57%	1.77%	1.55%	1.64%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PRA.TO and GLCC.TO in my portfolio?

PRA.TO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.