SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO
SBT.TO (Purpose Silver Bullion Fund) and CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SBT.TO is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price, while CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SBT.TO returned 13.84%/yr vs 13.74%/yr for CGL-C.TO. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SBT.TO charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL-C.TO.
Performance
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SBT.TO achieves a 2.24% return, which is significantly lower than CGL-C.TO's 4.39% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SBT.TO having a 13.84% annualized return and CGL-C.TO not far behind at 13.74%.
SBT.TO
- 1D
- -2.53%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 2.24%
- 6M
- 24.07%
- 1Y
- 105.34%
- 3Y*
- 42.09%
- 5Y*
- 18.84%
- 10Y*
- 13.84%
CGL-C.TO
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- YTD
- 4.39%
- 6M
- 5.02%
- 1Y
- 33.57%
- 3Y*
- 32.37%
- 5Y*
- 21.30%
- 10Y*
- 13.74%
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SBT.TO Purpose Silver Bullion Fund | 2.24% | 137.07% | 18.55% | -0.86% | 1.99% | -13.18% | 48.01% | 13.31% | -12.82% | -17.07% |
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 4.39% | 55.55% | 37.41% | 10.13% | 6.11% | -4.85% | 21.75% | 11.98% | 6.86% | 4.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between SBT.TO and CGL-C.TO is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2016 | 0.28 |
Over the past year, SBT.TO and CGL-C.TO have become more correlated (0.68) than their long-term average of 0.28, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank
SBT.TO
CGL-C.TO
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose Silver Bullion Fund (SBT.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.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.
| SBT.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.27 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 1.94 | +0.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.33 | 4.77 | +0.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SBT.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.80 | 1.33 | +0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 1.26 | -0.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 | 0.89 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.21 | 0.60 | -0.39 |
Drawdowns
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SBT.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.82%, which is greater than CGL-C.TO's maximum drawdown of -33.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SBT.TO and CGL-C.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SBT.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.82% | -33.04% | -14.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -42.69% | -17.37% | -25.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -42.69% | -17.37% | -25.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.69% | -17.55% | -25.14% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -47.82% | -22.78% | -25.04% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -37.47% | -15.34% | -22.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.92% | -12.24% | -4.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 19.84% | 7.06% | +12.78% |
Volatility
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
Purpose Silver Bullion Fund (SBT.TO) has a higher volatility of 17.19% compared to iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) at 5.33%. This indicates that SBT.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGL-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SBT.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.19% | 5.33% | +11.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 57.92% | 21.56% | +36.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.01% | 25.35% | +33.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.64% | 16.98% | +19.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 66.58% | 15.56% | +51.02% |
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
SBT.TO has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL-C.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
SBT.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither SBT.TO nor CGL-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SBT.TO and CGL-C.TO have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SBT.TO is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SBT.TO is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
SBT.TO is categorized as Silver, while CGL-C.TO is Precious Metals. SBT.TO tracks LBMA Silver Price, while CGL-C.TO tracks Gold. They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for SBT.TO and 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
Find the right allocation for SBT.TO and CGL-C.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