XMD.TO vs. CGL-C.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO).

XMD.TO and CGL-C.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XMD.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Morningstar Canada Sml GR CAD. It was launched on Mar 2, 2001. CGL-C.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Mar 31, 2011. Both XMD.TO and CGL-C.TO are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

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

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XMD.TO iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF	7.32%	41.38%	23.55%	10.01%	-4.90%	13.78%	6.05%	26.03%	-13.07%	6.17%
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF	10.00%	55.55%	37.41%	10.13%	6.11%	-4.85%	21.75%	11.98%	6.86%	4.31%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMD.TO achieves a 7.32% return, which is significantly lower than CGL-C.TO's 10.00% return. Over the past 10 years, XMD.TO has underperformed CGL-C.TO with an annualized return of 12.14%, while CGL-C.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 14.43% annualized return.

XMD.TO

• 1D: 4.07%
• 1M: -8.77%
• YTD: 7.32%
• 6M: 15.79%
• 1Y: 51.11%
• 3Y*: 24.72%
• 5Y*: 15.89%
• 10Y*: 12.14%

CGL-C.TO

• 1D: 3.62%
• 1M: -9.28%
• YTD: 10.00%
• 6M: 20.69%
• 1Y: 43.80%
• 3Y*: 33.85%
• 5Y*: 23.89%
• 10Y*: 14.43%

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

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

XMD.TO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CGL-C.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.

XMD.TO

iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF

CGL-C.TO

iShares Gold Bullion ETF

Return for Risk

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

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

XMD.TO

XMD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 94
XMD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
XMD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
XMD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 96
XMD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
XMD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 94

CGL-C.TO

CGL-C.TO Risk / Return Rank: 85
CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CGL-C.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CGL-C.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CGL-C.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
CGL-C.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.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.

	XMD.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.45	1.68	+0.77
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	2.14	+0.78
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.32	+0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.42	2.69	+0.73
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.24	9.29	+4.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMD.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is higher than the CGL-C.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMD.TO and CGL-C.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMD.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.45	1.68	+0.77
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98	1.44	-0.46
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.73	0.94	-0.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.54	0.63	-0.09

Correlation

The correlation between XMD.TO and CGL-C.TO is 0.12, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

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

XMD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, while CGL-C.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
XMD.TO iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF	0.87%	0.97%	1.58%	1.91%	2.24%	1.17%	1.91%	2.55%	2.44%	1.76%	1.97%	2.34%
CGL-C.TO iShares 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%

Drawdowns

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

The maximum XMD.TO drawdown since its inception was -53.42%, which is greater than CGL-C.TO's maximum drawdown of -33.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMD.TO and CGL-C.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMD.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.42%	-33.04%	-20.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.12%	-17.37%	+2.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.16%	-17.55%	-0.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.40%	-22.78%	-20.62%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.84%	-10.79%	+1.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.21%	-12.23%	+4.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.63%	5.03%	-1.40%

Volatility

XMD.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P/TSX Completion Index ETF (XMD.TO) is 8.82%, while iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) has a volatility of 10.97%. This indicates that XMD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGL-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMD.TO	CGL-C.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.82%	10.97%	-2.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.94%	23.21%	-6.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.98%	26.21%	-5.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.38%	16.73%	-0.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.82%	15.49%	+1.33%