RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RGPM.NEO (RBC Global Precious Metals Fund) and KILO-B.TO (Purpose Gold Bullion Fund ETF Non-Currency Hedged) are both exchange-traded funds - RGPM.NEO is a Precious Metals fund actively managed by RBC Global Asset Management., while KILO-B.TO is a Gold fund actively managed by Purpose Investments. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RGPM.NEO returned 45.86%/yr vs 32.83%/yr for KILO-B.TO. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RGPM.NEO charges 1.02%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for KILO-B.TO.

Performance

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) and Purpose Gold Bullion Fund ETF Non-Currency Hedged (KILO-B.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RGPM.NEO achieves a 2.68% return, which is significantly lower than KILO-B.TO's 4.82% return.

RGPM.NEO

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 2.09%
• YTD: 2.68%
• 6M: 9.50%
• 1Y: 62.65%
• 3Y*: 45.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KILO-B.TO

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 4.82%
• 6M: 5.56%
• 1Y: 34.38%
• 3Y*: 32.83%
• 5Y*: 22.03%
• 10Y*: —

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

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RGPM.NEO RBC Global Precious Metals Fund	2.68%	143.89%	36.75%	-3.95%
KILO-B.TO Purpose Gold Bullion Fund ETF Non-Currency Hedged	4.82%	56.51%	37.76%	8.13%

Correlation

The correlation between RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.TO is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.51

Over the past year, RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.TO have become more correlated (0.75) than their long-term average of 0.51, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RGPM.NEO

RGPM.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 41
RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
RGPM.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
RGPM.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 44
RGPM.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
RGPM.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 37

KILO-B.TO

KILO-B.TO Risk / Return Rank: 38
KILO-B.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
KILO-B.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
KILO-B.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 44
KILO-B.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
KILO-B.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) and Purpose Gold Bullion Fund ETF Non-Currency Hedged (KILO-B.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.

	RGPM.NEO	KILO-B.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	1.38	+0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	1.81	+0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.28	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.14	1.98	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.76	4.86	+0.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the KILO-B.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.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

	RGPM.NEO	KILO-B.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	1.38	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.32	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.36	1.21	+0.15

Drawdowns

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RGPM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -29.46%, which is greater than KILO-B.TO's maximum drawdown of -22.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RGPM.NEO	KILO-B.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.46%	-22.54%	-6.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.46%	-17.41%	-12.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.46%	-17.41%	-12.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.85%	-14.92%	-7.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.39%	-7.73%	-0.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.91%	7.10%	+3.81%

Volatility

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Volatility Comparison

RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) has a higher volatility of 16.12% compared to Purpose Gold Bullion Fund ETF Non-Currency Hedged (KILO-B.TO) at 5.37%. This indicates that RGPM.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KILO-B.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RGPM.NEO	KILO-B.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.12%	5.37%	+10.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.57%	21.49%	+14.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.99%	25.05%	+17.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.71%	16.84%	+15.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.71%	17.99%	+14.72%

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RGPM.NEO has a 1.02% expense ratio, which is higher than KILO-B.TO's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

RGPM.NEO vs. KILO-B.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither RGPM.NEO nor KILO-B.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
KILO-B.TO Purpose Gold Bullion Fund ETF Non-Currency Hedged	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.69%
RGPM.NEO RBC Global Precious Metals Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.TO in my portfolio?

RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.TO have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RGPM.NEO or KILO-B.TO?

On fees, KILO-B.TO is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RGPM.NEO or KILO-B.TO?

KILO-B.TO is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.

What is the main difference between RGPM.NEO and KILO-B.TO?

RGPM.NEO is categorized as Precious Metals, while KILO-B.TO is Gold. They also come from different issuers: RBC Global Asset Management. and Purpose Investments. Their fees differ too: 1.02% for RGPM.NEO and 0.28% for KILO-B.TO.