XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XQQU.TO (iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF) and CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - XQQU.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while CGL.TO is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold Bullion. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XQQU.TO returned 43.63% vs 29.45% for CGL.TO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XQQU.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL.TO.

Performance

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (XQQU.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XQQU.TO achieves a 22.83% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's 2.15% return.

XQQU.TO

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 13.16%
• YTD: 22.83%
• 6M: 19.29%
• 1Y: 43.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGL.TO

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: -1.87%
• YTD: 2.15%
• 6M: 4.29%
• 1Y: 29.45%
• 3Y*: 29.31%
• 5Y*: 16.83%
• 10Y*: 11.98%

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

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XQQU.TO iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF	22.83%	15.17%	36.07%	6.90%
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	2.15%	60.12%	25.67%	7.63%

Correlation

The correlation between XQQU.TO and CGL.TO is 0.08, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2023	0.01

Return for Risk

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XQQU.TO

XQQU.TO Risk / Return Rank: 76
XQQU.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
XQQU.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
XQQU.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 80
XQQU.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
XQQU.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

CGL.TO

CGL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 29
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 32
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (XQQU.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.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.

	XQQU.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	1.10	+1.71
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.67	1.51	+2.16
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.22	+0.27
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.61	1.53	+2.08
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.54	3.75	+7.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XQQU.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is higher than the CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XQQU.TO and CGL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XQQU.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81	1.10	+1.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.92	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.61	0.48	+1.13

Drawdowns

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XQQU.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.68%, smaller than the maximum CGL.TO drawdown of -44.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XQQU.TO and CGL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XQQU.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.68%	-44.53%	+21.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.16%	-19.36%	+7.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.36%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.18%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-23.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-18.22%	+18.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.37%	-18.16%	+14.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.79%	7.88%	-4.09%

Volatility

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (XQQU.TO) is 4.36%, while iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a volatility of 5.60%. This indicates that XQQU.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XQQU.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.36%	5.60%	-1.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.78%	23.18%	-11.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.61%	26.89%	-11.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.77%	18.33%	+1.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.77%	16.41%	+3.36%

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XQQU.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

XQQU.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison

XQQU.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XQQU.TO iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF	0.21%	0.26%	0.20%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XQQU.TO and CGL.TO in my portfolio?

XQQU.TO and CGL.TO have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XQQU.TO or CGL.TO?

On fees, XQQU.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XQQU.TO or CGL.TO?

XQQU.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CGL.TO.

What is the main difference between XQQU.TO and CGL.TO?

XQQU.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CGL.TO is Precious Metals. XQQU.TO tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for XQQU.TO and 0.55% for CGL.TO.