PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO
PSA.TO (Purpose High Interest Savings Fund) and CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - PSA.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by Purpose Investments, while CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion. PSA.TO is actively managed, while CGL.TO is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PSA.TO returned 2.26%/yr vs 10.99%/yr for CGL.TO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PSA.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL.TO.
Performance
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PSA.TO achieves a 0.97% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's -3.19% return. Over the past 10 years, PSA.TO has underperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 2.26%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 10.99% annualized return.
PSA.TO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.15%
- YTD
- 0.97%
- 6M
- 1.10%
- 1Y
- 2.34%
- 3Y*
- 3.71%
- 5Y*
- 3.18%
- 10Y*
- 2.26%
CGL.TO
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- -7.59%
- YTD
- -3.19%
- 6M
- -3.25%
- 1Y
- 19.93%
- 3Y*
- 27.16%
- 5Y*
- 15.73%
- 10Y*
- 10.99%
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PSA.TO Purpose High Interest Savings Fund | 0.97% | 2.64% | 4.55% | 5.13% | 2.32% | 0.61% | 0.93% | 2.22% | 1.65% | 1.08% |
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 PSA.TO and CGL.TO is -0.00, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.00 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.00 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2013 | 0.01 |
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
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO — Risk / Return Rank
PSA.TO
CGL.TO
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose High Interest Savings Fund (PSA.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.
| PSA.TO | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +8.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +23.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 6.11 | 1.16 | +4.95 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 119.32 | 0.87 | +118.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 370.97 | 2.49 | +368.48 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PSA.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.04%, smaller than the maximum CGL.TO drawdown of -45.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSA.TO and CGL.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PSA.TO | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.04% | -45.96% | +45.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.02% | -24.93% | +24.91% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.02% | -24.93% | +24.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.04% | -24.93% | +24.89% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -0.04% | -24.93% | +24.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -22.50% | +22.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.00% | -20.30% | +20.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 8.66% | -8.65% |
Volatility
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Purpose High Interest Savings Fund (PSA.TO) is 0.06%, while iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a volatility of 7.67%. This indicates that PSA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PSA.TO | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.06% | 7.67% | -7.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.17% | 24.08% | -23.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25% | 27.61% | -27.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.29% | 18.54% | -18.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.25% | 16.53% | -16.28% |
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
PSA.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
PSA.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison
PSA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
PSA.TO Purpose High Interest Savings Fund | 2.33% | 2.61% | 4.46% | 5.05% | 2.26% | 0.59% | 0.94% | 2.18% | 1.66% | 1.07% | 0.99% | 1.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PSA.TO and CGL.TO have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PSA.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PSA.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL.TO.
PSA.TO is categorized as Money Market, while CGL.TO is Gold. They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for PSA.TO and 0.55% for CGL.TO.
Find the right allocation for PSA.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