QQQ vs. CGL.TO
QQQ (Invesco QQQ ETF) and CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QQQ returned 21.79%/yr vs 10.05%/yr for CGL.TO. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL.TO.
Performance
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
QQQ is traded in USD, while CGL.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CGL.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QQQ achieves a 17.57% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's -5.12% return. Over the past 10 years, QQQ has outperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 21.79%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 10.05% annualized return.
QQQ
- 1D
- 0.59%
- 1M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- 17.57%
- 6M
- 17.85%
- 1Y
- 37.55%
- 3Y*
- 26.43%
- 5Y*
- 16.85%
- 10Y*
- 21.79%
CGL.TO
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- -11.35%
- YTD
- -5.12%
- 6M
- -4.61%
- 1Y
- 16.70%
- 3Y*
- 25.29%
- 5Y*
- 12.44%
- 10Y*
- 10.05%
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF | 17.57% | 20.77% | 25.58% | 54.86% | -32.58% | 27.42% | 48.62% | 38.96% | -0.13% | 32.66% |
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) | -5.12% | 67.73% | 15.88% | 13.97% | -6.96% | -4.54% | 26.41% | 21.59% | -10.70% | 19.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between QQQ and CGL.TO is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2010 | 0.04 |
The correlation between QQQ and CGL.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (all time) to 0.21 (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.
Return for Risk
QQQ vs. CGL.TO — Risk / Return Rank
QQQ
CGL.TO
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) 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.
| QQQ | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.14 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.01 | 0.70 | +2.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.22 | 2.00 | +9.22 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QQQ drawdown since its inception was -82.97%, which is greater than CGL.TO's maximum drawdown of -62.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQ and CGL.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QQQ | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -82.97% | -62.05% | -20.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.96% | -27.17% | +15.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.77% | -27.17% | +4.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.12% | -27.17% | -7.95% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.12% | -27.17% | -7.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.33% | -24.91% | +21.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.75% | -32.74% | -0.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.20% | 9.43% | -6.23% |
Volatility
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison
Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) have volatilities of 7.56% and 7.69%, 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
| QQQ | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.56% | 7.69% | -0.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.81% | 24.50% | -10.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.19% | 28.25% | -11.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.55% | 19.70% | +2.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.38% | 17.92% | +4.46% |
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
QQQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
QQQ vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison
QQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, 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% |
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF | 0.39% | 0.45% | 0.56% | 0.62% | 0.80% | 0.43% | 0.55% | 0.74% | 0.91% | 0.84% | 1.06% | 0.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QQQ and CGL.TO have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QQQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QQQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL.TO.
QQQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CGL.TO is Gold. QQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for QQQ and 0.55% for CGL.TO.
Find the right allocation for QQQ 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