VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

VFV.TO (Vanguard S&P 500 Index ETF) and CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VFV.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CGL-C.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. Both are passively managed. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. VFV.TO charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL-C.TO.

Performance

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Vanguard S&P 500 Index ETF (VFV.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VFV.TO achieves a 10.06% return, which is significantly higher than CGL-C.TO's 4.95% return.

VFV.TO

• 1D: -2.35%
• 1M: 2.71%
• YTD: 10.06%
• 6M: 8.92%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGL-C.TO

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: -2.88%
• YTD: 4.95%
• 6M: 6.74%
• 1Y: 34.64%
• 3Y*: 32.37%
• 5Y*: 21.43%
• 10Y*: 13.90%

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

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
VFV.TO Vanguard S&P 500 Index ETF	10.06%	14.91%
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF	4.95%	29.73%

Correlation

The correlation between VFV.TO and CGL-C.TO is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2025	0.09

Return for Risk

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGL-C.TO

CGL-C.TO Risk / Return Rank: 37
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 41
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard S&P 500 Index ETF (VFV.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.

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

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	VFV.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.34	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.27	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.90	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.30	0.60	+1.70

Drawdowns

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VFV.TO drawdown since its inception was -8.62%, smaller than the maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown of -33.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VFV.TO and CGL-C.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	VFV.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.62%	-33.04%	+24.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-17.37%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.37%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.55%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-22.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.35%	-14.88%	+12.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.38%	-12.24%	+10.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	7.12%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	VFV.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.29%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	21.55%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.65%	25.34%	-13.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.65%	16.97%	-5.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.65%	15.56%	-3.91%

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

VFV.TO has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL-C.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

VFV.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Dividend Comparison

VFV.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, while CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VFV.TO Vanguard S&P 500 Index ETF	0.85%	0.92%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VFV.TO and CGL-C.TO in my portfolio?

VFV.TO and CGL-C.TO have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, VFV.TO or CGL-C.TO?

On fees, VFV.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, VFV.TO or CGL-C.TO?

VFV.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.

What is the main difference between VFV.TO and CGL-C.TO?

VFV.TO is categorized as S&P 500, while CGL-C.TO is Precious Metals. VFV.TO tracks S&P 500 Index, while CGL-C.TO tracks Gold. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for VFV.TO and 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.