VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

VALT.TO (CI Gold Bullion ETF) and HGGG.TO (Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF) are both Gold funds - VALT.TO tracks the No Index (Physical Commodity) while HGGG.TO tracks the Solactive Global Gold Giants Index TR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, VALT.TO returned 16.17%/yr vs 24.46%/yr for HGGG.TO. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. VALT.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for HGGG.TO.

Performance

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) and Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VALT.TO achieves a -6.93% return, which is significantly higher than HGGG.TO's -10.67% return.

VALT.TO

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 1.59%
• 6M: -19.64%
• YTD: -6.93%
• 1Y: 17.76%
• 3Y*: 25.22%
• 5Y*: 16.17%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.95%

HGGG.TO

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 1.55%
• 6M: -26.45%
• YTD: -10.67%
• 1Y: 57.14%
• 3Y*: 44.68%
• 5Y*: 24.46%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.93%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF	CA$456.81K	CA$282.67K	CA$247.91K
VALT.TO CI Gold Bullion ETF	CA$185.75K	CA$223.40K	CA$363.49K

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
VALT.TO CI Gold Bullion ETF	-6.93%	60.46%	25.58%	12.35%	0.92%	-3.19%
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF	-10.67%	170.60%	26.04%	4.17%	-4.68%	-14.18%

Correlation

The correlation between VALT.TO and HGGG.TO is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2021	0.49

Over the past year, VALT.TO and HGGG.TO have become more correlated (0.73) than their long-term average of 0.49, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

VALT.TO

VALT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 25
VALT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
VALT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
VALT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 29
VALT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
VALT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

HGGG.TO

HGGG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 45
HGGG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
HGGG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
HGGG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 49
HGGG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
HGGG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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.

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) and Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.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.

	VALT.TO	HGGG.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.63	1.21	-0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.97	1.70	-0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.22	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.66	1.52	-0.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.48	3.38	-1.90

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VALT.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.63, which is lower than the HGGG.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VALT.TO and HGGG.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.

Drawdowns

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VALT.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.07%, smaller than the maximum HGGG.TO drawdown of -52.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VALT.TO and HGGG.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	VALT.TO	HGGG.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.07%	-52.29%	+25.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.07%	-37.71%	+10.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.07%	-37.71%	+10.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.07%	-39.14%	+12.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.75%	-33.01%	+7.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.25%	-20.68%	+14.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.03%	16.98%	-4.95%

Volatility

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) is 6.20%, while Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF (HGGG.TO) has a volatility of 13.78%. This indicates that VALT.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HGGG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VALT.TO	HGGG.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.20%	13.78%	-7.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.23%	38.65%	-14.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.23%	47.33%	-19.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.62%	33.96%	-15.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.21%	33.45%	-15.24%

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

VALT.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than HGGG.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

VALT.TO vs. HGGG.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither VALT.TO nor HGGG.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
HGGG.TO Harvest Global Gold Giants Index ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.65%	0.54%
VALT.TO CI Gold Bullion ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VALT.TO and HGGG.TO in my portfolio?

VALT.TO and HGGG.TO have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, VALT.TO or HGGG.TO?

On fees, VALT.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, VALT.TO or HGGG.TO?

VALT.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for HGGG.TO.

What is the main difference between VALT.TO and HGGG.TO?

VALT.TO tracks No Index (Physical Commodity), while HGGG.TO tracks Solactive Global Gold Giants Index TR. They also come from different issuers: CI Global Asset Management and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for VALT.TO and 0.40% for HGGG.TO.