RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.TO

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

RGPM.NEO (RBC Global Precious Metals Fund) and ZGLH.TO (BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RGPM.NEO is a Precious Metals fund actively managed by RBC Global Asset Management., while ZGLH.TO is a Gold fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RGPM.NEO charges 1.02%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for ZGLH.TO.

Performance

RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.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 BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF (ZGLH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

RGPM.NEO

• 1D: 1.05%
• 1M: -12.86%
• YTD: -8.76%
• 6M: -11.07%
• 1Y: 47.81%
• 3Y*: 42.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZGLH.TO

• 1D: 1.10%
• 1M: -10.76%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
RGPM.NEO RBC Global Precious Metals Fund	-20.08%
ZGLH.TO BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF	-16.31%

Correlation

The correlation between RGPM.NEO and ZGLH.TO is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 20, 2026	0.80

Return for Risk

RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.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: 31
RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
RGPM.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
RGPM.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 35
RGPM.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
RGPM.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 29

ZGLH.TO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. ZGLH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) and BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF (ZGLH.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.

	RGPM.NEO	ZGLH.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.49	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.74	—	—

Drawdowns

RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RGPM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -33.65%, which is greater than ZGLH.TO's maximum drawdown of -26.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RGPM.NEO and ZGLH.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RGPM.NEO	ZGLH.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.65%	-26.73%	-6.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-33.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.65%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-31.44%	-25.92%	-5.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.75%	-12.39%	+3.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.85%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RGPM.NEO	ZGLH.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.44%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.66%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	45.85%	34.91%	+10.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.69%	34.91%	-1.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.69%	34.91%	-1.22%

RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RGPM.NEO has a 1.02% expense ratio, which is higher than ZGLH.TO's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

RGPM.NEO vs. ZGLH.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither RGPM.NEO nor ZGLH.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RGPM.NEO and ZGLH.TO in my portfolio?

RGPM.NEO and ZGLH.TO have a correlation of 0.80, 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 ZGLH.TO?

On fees, ZGLH.TO is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RGPM.NEO or ZGLH.TO?

ZGLH.TO is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.

What is the main difference between RGPM.NEO and ZGLH.TO?

RGPM.NEO is categorized as Precious Metals, while ZGLH.TO is Gold. They also come from different issuers: RBC Global Asset Management. and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.02% for RGPM.NEO and 0.23% for ZGLH.TO.