XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO
XGDU.L (Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities) and CGL-C.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF) are both Precious Metals funds tracking the Gold, from Xtrackers and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XGDU.L returned 18.61%/yr vs 18.07%/yr for CGL-C.TO. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XGDU.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL-C.TO.
Performance
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XGDU.L is traded in USD, while CGL-C.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CGL-C.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XGDU.L having a 3.77% return and CGL-C.TO slightly lower at 3.61%.
XGDU.L
- 1D
- 0.58%
- 1M
- -2.38%
- YTD
- 3.77%
- 6M
- 5.98%
- 1Y
- 32.35%
- 3Y*
- 31.54%
- 5Y*
- 18.61%
- 10Y*
- —
CGL-C.TO
- 1D
- 0.46%
- 1M
- -1.94%
- YTD
- 3.61%
- 6M
- 5.87%
- 1Y
- 31.52%
- 3Y*
- 30.89%
- 5Y*
- 18.07%
- 10Y*
- 12.98%
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XGDU.L Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities | 3.77% | 64.71% | 26.20% | 13.45% | 0.32% | -3.91% | 9.83% |
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 3.61% | 63.00% | 26.55% | 12.64% | -0.99% | -4.15% | 9.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between XGDU.L and CGL-C.TO is 0.81, 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 | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2020 | 0.78 |
The correlation between XGDU.L and CGL-C.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XGDU.L
CGL-C.TO
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.L) 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.
| XGDU.L | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.24 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.84 | 1.64 | +0.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.73 | 4.02 | +0.71 |
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
| XGDU.L | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.30 | 1.19 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.08 | 1.00 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.81 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.00 | 0.42 | +0.59 |
Drawdowns
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XGDU.L drawdown since its inception was -21.59%, smaller than the maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown of -45.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGDU.L and CGL-C.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XGDU.L | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.59% | -45.09% | +23.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.47% | -19.31% | +1.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.47% | -19.31% | +1.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.00% | -21.60% | +0.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -22.53% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.82% | -17.29% | +1.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.31% | -20.11% | +12.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.82% | 7.86% | -1.04% |
Volatility
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers IE Physical Gold ETC Securities (XGDU.L) has a higher volatility of 6.39% compared to iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) at 5.56%. This indicates that XGDU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGL-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XGDU.L | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.39% | 5.56% | +0.83% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.85% | 22.89% | -1.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.87% | 26.58% | -1.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.32% | 18.17% | -0.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.31% | 16.27% | +1.04% |
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XGDU.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL-C.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
XGDU.L vs. CGL-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither XGDU.L nor CGL-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XGDU.L and CGL-C.TO have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XGDU.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XGDU.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
Both ETFs track Gold. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for XGDU.L and 0.55% for CGL-C.TO.
Find the right allocation for XGDU.L and CGL-C.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