PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VALT.TO vs. ZGD.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VALT.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VALT.TO achieves a -6.93% return, which is significantly lower than ZGD.TO's -5.14% 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%

ZGD.TO

1D
0.51%
1M
1.34%
6M
-23.28%
YTD
-5.14%
1Y
47.27%
3Y*
47.06%
5Y*
28.36%
10Y*
13.88%
ALL TIME*
9.04%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$185.75KCA$223.40KCA$363.49K
CA$1.15MCA$3.42MCA$4.67M

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
VALT.TO
CI Gold Bullion ETF
-6.93%60.46%25.58%12.35%0.92%-3.19%
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF
-5.14%143.74%37.44%10.13%-2.33%-10.08%

Correlation

The correlation between VALT.TO and ZGD.TO is 0.79, 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

0.79

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.71

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2021

0.60

The correlation between VALT.TO and ZGD.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (all time) to 0.79 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

VALT.TO vs. ZGD.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: 2525
Overall Rank
VALT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VALT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
VALT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
VALT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
VALT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

ZGD.TO
ZGD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
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. ZGD.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.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.TOZGD.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.19

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.66

1.35

-0.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.48

3.02

-1.54

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

The current VALT.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.63, which is lower than the ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VALT.TO and ZGD.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

VALT.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VALT.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.07%, smaller than the maximum ZGD.TO drawdown of -60.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VALT.TO and ZGD.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VALT.TOZGD.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.07%

-60.59%

+33.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.07%

-35.30%

+8.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.07%

-35.30%

+8.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.07%

-42.75%

+15.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.75%

-31.04%

+5.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.25%

-28.84%

+22.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

12.03%

15.71%

-3.68%

Volatility

VALT.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI Gold Bullion ETF (VALT.TO) is 6.20%, while BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO) has a volatility of 13.87%. This indicates that VALT.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZGD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VALT.TOZGD.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.20%

13.87%

-7.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.23%

40.48%

-16.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.23%

49.52%

-21.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.62%

37.55%

-18.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.21%

37.65%

-19.44%

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

VALT.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than ZGD.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

VALT.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Dividend Comparison

VALT.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZGD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
VALT.TO
CI Gold Bullion ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF
0.23%0.22%0.56%0.72%0.73%0.36%0.15%1.14%0.00%0.00%0.06%0.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


VALT.TO and ZGD.TO have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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.

VALT.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ZGD.TO.

VALT.TO tracks No Index (Physical Commodity), while ZGD.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. They also come from different issuers: CI Global Asset Management and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for VALT.TO and 0.60% for ZGD.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for VALT.TO and ZGD.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