PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Global Gold Index ETF (XGD.TO) and RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XGD.TO achieves a 3.35% return, which is significantly higher than RGPM.NEO's 1.34% return.


XGD.TO

1D
-2.80%
1M
1.62%
YTD
3.35%
6M
8.72%
1Y
67.78%
3Y*
43.11%
5Y*
22.30%
10Y*
14.79%

RGPM.NEO

1D
-2.71%
1M
0.98%
YTD
1.34%
6M
8.72%
1Y
60.56%
3Y*
45.22%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
XGD.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Global Gold Index ETF
3.35%144.45%19.63%5.00%
RGPM.NEO
RBC Global Precious Metals Fund
1.34%143.89%36.75%-3.95%

Correlation

The correlation between XGD.TO and RGPM.NEO is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.91

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

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023

0.66

Over the past year, XGD.TO and RGPM.NEO have become more correlated (0.91) than their long-term average of 0.66, 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

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XGD.TO
XGD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
XGD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
XGD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank

RGPM.NEO
RGPM.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RGPM.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
RGPM.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
RGPM.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
RGPM.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Global Gold Index ETF (XGD.TO) and RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO). 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.


XGD.TORGPM.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.27

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.35

2.07

+0.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.22

5.61

+0.61

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XGD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XGD.TO and RGPM.NEO, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XGD.TORGPM.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.59

1.42

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.25

1.34

-1.09

Drawdowns

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XGD.TO drawdown since its inception was -72.55%, which is greater than RGPM.NEO's maximum drawdown of -29.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGD.TO and RGPM.NEO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XGD.TORGPM.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.55%

-29.46%

-43.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.95%

-29.46%

+0.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.95%

-29.46%

+0.51%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.82%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.49%

-23.85%

+0.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.30%

-8.38%

-19.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.93%

10.82%

+0.11%

Volatility

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P/TSX Global Gold Index ETF (XGD.TO) is 14.43%, while RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) has a volatility of 16.07%. This indicates that XGD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RGPM.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XGD.TORGPM.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.43%

16.07%

-1.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

34.40%

35.62%

-1.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

42.86%

42.98%

-0.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.64%

32.73%

-0.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.38%

32.73%

+0.65%

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XGD.TO has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than RGPM.NEO's 1.02% expense ratio.


Dividends

XGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XGD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, while RGPM.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RGPM.NEO
RBC Global Precious Metals Fund
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XGD.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Global Gold Index ETF
0.60%0.62%0.93%1.49%1.80%1.38%0.35%0.54%0.25%0.14%0.09%0.57%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, XGD.TO and RGPM.NEO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, XGD.TO is cheaper at 0.61% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XGD.TO is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and RBC Global Asset Management.. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for XGD.TO and 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XGD.TO and RGPM.NEO

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