XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

XUS-U.TO (iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF) and CGL.TO (iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - XUS-U.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CGL.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Gold Bullion. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XUS-U.TO returned 12.85%/yr vs 13.11%/yr for CGL.TO. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XUS-U.TO charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CGL.TO.

Performance

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Different Trading Currencies

XUS-U.TO is traded in USD, while CGL.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CGL.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XUS-U.TO achieves a 10.41% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's -9.50% return.

XUS-U.TO

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.22%
• 6M: 9.85%
• YTD: 10.41%
• 1Y: 21.81%
• 3Y*: 20.15%
• 5Y*: 12.85%
• 10Y*: —

CGL.TO

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: -7.02%
• 6M: -14.70%
• YTD: -9.50%
• 1Y: 16.01%
• 3Y*: 22.27%
• 5Y*: 13.11%
• 10Y*: 9.24%

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

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
XUS-U.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF	10.41%	18.07%	24.74%	26.55%	-18.73%	27.72%	18.39%	8.13%
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	-9.50%	67.73%	15.88%	13.97%	-6.96%	-4.54%	26.41%	3.60%

Correlation

The correlation between XUS-U.TO and CGL.TO is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2019	0.14

The correlation between XUS-U.TO and CGL.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (5 years) to 0.27 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XUS-U.TO

XUS-U.TO Risk / Return Rank: 66
XUS-U.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
XUS-U.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
XUS-U.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
XUS-U.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
XUS-U.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 72

CGL.TO

CGL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 22
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 24
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS-U.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	XUS-U.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	0.55	+1.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	0.89	+1.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.12	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.35	0.53	+1.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.57	1.29	+9.28

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XUS-U.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is higher than the CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XUS-U.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.

Drawdowns

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XUS-U.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.55%, smaller than the maximum CGL.TO drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XUS-U.TO and CGL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XUS-U.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.55%	-61.04%	+27.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.30%	-30.25%	+20.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.65%	-30.25%	+11.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.96%	-30.25%	+5.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.53%	-28.37%	+27.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.38%	-31.47%	+26.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.07%	12.41%	-10.34%

Volatility

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS-U.TO) is 3.19%, while iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that XUS-U.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

	XUS-U.TO	CGL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.19%	7.77%	-4.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.11%	25.15%	-15.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.54%	28.98%	-16.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.78%	19.90%	-3.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.11%	17.99%	+1.12%

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

XUS-U.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison

XUS-U.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CGL.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XUS-U.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF	1.14%	1.25%	1.04%	1.19%	1.38%	0.89%	1.20%	0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XUS-U.TO and CGL.TO in my portfolio?

XUS-U.TO and CGL.TO have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XUS-U.TO or CGL.TO?

On fees, XUS-U.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, XUS-U.TO or CGL.TO?

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

What is the main difference between XUS-U.TO and CGL.TO?

XUS-U.TO is categorized as S&P 500, while CGL.TO is Gold. XUS-U.TO tracks S&P 500 Index, while CGL.TO tracks Gold Bullion. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for XUS-U.TO and 0.55% for CGL.TO.