PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZGD.TO vs. CGL.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

ZGD.TO vs. CGL.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO).

ZGD.TO and CGL.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. ZGD.TO is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. It was launched on Nov 14, 2012. CGL.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold Bullion. It was launched on May 28, 2009. Both ZGD.TO and CGL.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

ZGD.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading graphics...

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF		11.73%170.64%37.48%10.17%-2.30%-12.57%26.59%53.72%-12.09%-0.73%
CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)		8.13%60.12%25.67%11.26%-1.07%-4.58%23.41%16.58%-3.19%11.68%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZGD.TO achieves a 11.73% return, which is significantly higher than CGL.TO's 8.13% return. Over the past 10 years, ZGD.TO has outperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 21.57%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 12.77% annualized return.

ZGD.TO

1D
7.87%
1M
-18.70%
YTD
11.73%
6M
31.71%
1Y
123.98%
3Y*
57.32%
5Y*
35.00%
10Y*
21.57%

CGL.TO

1D
3.91%
1M
-11.27%
YTD
8.13%
6M
19.83%
1Y
45.70%
3Y*
31.08%
5Y*
20.28%
10Y*
12.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF

iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with ZGD.TO:
ZGD.TO vs. XGD.TOZGD.TO vs. GLDZGD.TO vs. AMAX.TOZGD.TO vs. GDXUZGD.TO vs. SGDMZGD.TO vs. ZEB.TOZGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO
Often compared with CGL.TO:
CGL.TO vs. CGL-C.TOCGL.TO vs. XGD.TOCGL.TO vs. KILO.TOCGL.TO vs. MNT.TOCGL.TO vs. GLDMCGL.TO vs. VOOCGL.TO vs. SVR.TO

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

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

ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF
CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZGD.TO
ZGD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
CGL.TO
CGL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.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.

ZGD.TOCGL.TODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.75

1.65

+1.10

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.86

2.10

+0.76

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.31

+0.13

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.17

2.47

+1.69

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

15.14

9.06

+6.09

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.75, which is higher than the CGL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZGD.TO and CGL.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.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

ZGD.TOCGL.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.75

1.65

+1.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.98

1.14

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

0.79

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.51

-0.21

Correlation

The correlation between ZGD.TO and CGL.TO is 0.63, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

ZGD.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZGD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.20%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF		0.20%0.22%0.59%0.76%0.77%0.38%0.16%1.20%0.00%0.00%0.32%0.46%
CGL.TO
iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged)		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

ZGD.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZGD.TO drawdown since its inception was -60.12%, which is greater than CGL.TO's maximum drawdown of -44.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZGD.TO and CGL.TO.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

ZGD.TOCGL.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.12%

-44.53%

-15.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-30.15%

-19.36%

-10.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.75%

-22.18%

-20.57%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.72%

-23.72%

-28.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.77%

-13.43%

-5.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.47%

-18.20%

-10.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.30%

5.29%

+3.01%

Volatility

ZGD.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO) has a higher volatility of 18.29% compared to iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) at 11.20%. This indicates that ZGD.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period

ZGD.TOCGL.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

18.29%

11.20%

+7.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

37.55%

24.10%

+13.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

45.29%

27.83%

+17.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

35.83%

17.98%

+17.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

37.54%

16.28%

+21.26%