SBT.TO vs. CGL.TO
SBT.TO (Purpose Silver Bullion Fund) and CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - SBT.TO is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price, while CGL.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold Bullion. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SBT.TO returned 13.84%/yr vs 11.98%/yr for CGL.TO. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SBT.TO charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL.TO.
Performance
SBT.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with SBT.TO having a 2.24% return and CGL.TO slightly lower at 2.15%. Over the past 10 years, SBT.TO has outperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 13.84%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 11.98% annualized return.
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.TO
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -1.87%
- YTD
- 2.15%
- 6M
- 4.29%
- 1Y
- 29.45%
- 3Y*
- 29.31%
- 5Y*
- 16.83%
- 10Y*
- 11.98%
SBT.TO vs. CGL.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.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 2.15% | 60.12% | 25.67% | 11.26% | -1.07% | -4.58% | 23.41% | 16.58% | -3.19% | 11.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between SBT.TO and CGL.TO is 0.69, 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 | 0.69 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2016 | 0.33 |
Over the past year, SBT.TO and CGL.TO have become more correlated (0.69) than their long-term average of 0.33, 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.TO — Risk / Return Rank
SBT.TO
CGL.TO
SBT.TO vs. CGL.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 (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.
| SBT.TO | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.22 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 1.53 | +0.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.33 | 3.75 | +1.58 |
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.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.80 | 1.10 | +0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.92 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 | 0.73 | -0.53 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.21 | 0.48 | -0.27 |
Drawdowns
SBT.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SBT.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.82%, which is greater than CGL.TO's maximum drawdown of -44.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SBT.TO and CGL.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SBT.TO | CGL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.82% | -44.53% | -3.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -42.69% | -19.36% | -23.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -42.69% | -19.36% | -23.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.69% | -22.18% | -20.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -47.82% | -23.72% | -24.10% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -37.47% | -18.22% | -19.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.92% | -18.16% | +1.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 19.84% | 7.88% | +11.96% |
Volatility
SBT.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison
Purpose Silver Bullion Fund (SBT.TO) has a higher volatility of 17.19% compared to iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) at 5.60%. This indicates that SBT.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGL.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.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.19% | 5.60% | +11.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 57.92% | 23.18% | +34.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.01% | 26.89% | +32.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.64% | 18.33% | +18.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 66.58% | 16.41% | +50.17% |
SBT.TO vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
SBT.TO has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
SBT.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither SBT.TO nor CGL.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SBT.TO and CGL.TO have a correlation of 0.69, 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.TO.
SBT.TO is categorized as Silver, while CGL.TO is Precious Metals. SBT.TO tracks LBMA Silver Price, while CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion. They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for SBT.TO and 0.55% for CGL.TO.
Find the right allocation for SBT.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