ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO
Compare and contrast key facts about BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF (ZGLH.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO).
ZGLH.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. ZGLH.TO is an actively managed fund by BMO. It was launched on Mar 8, 2024. CGL-C.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Mar 31, 2011.
Performance
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ZGLH.TO BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF | 7.81% | 61.24% | 18.72% |
CGL-C.TO iShares Gold Bullion ETF | 10.00% | 55.55% | 27.75% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZGLH.TO achieves a 7.81% return, which is significantly lower than CGL-C.TO's 10.00% return.
ZGLH.TO
- 1D
- 4.00%
- 1M
- -11.16%
- YTD
- 7.81%
- 6M
- 19.83%
- 1Y
- 46.30%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
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%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZGLH.TO has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL-C.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZGLH.TO
CGL-C.TO
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF (ZGLH.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.
| ZGLH.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.71 | 1.68 | +0.03 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.15 | 2.14 | 0.00 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.32 | 0.00 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 2.69 | -0.21 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.14 | 9.29 | -0.15 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZGLH.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.71 | 1.68 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.44 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.94 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.92 | 0.63 | +1.29 |
Correlation
The correlation between ZGLH.TO and CGL-C.TO is 0.72, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither ZGLH.TO nor CGL-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZGLH.TO drawdown since its inception was -19.51%, smaller than the maximum CGL-C.TO drawdown of -33.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZGLH.TO and CGL-C.TO.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZGLH.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.51% | -33.04% | +13.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.51% | -17.37% | -2.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -22.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.47% | -10.79% | -2.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.71% | -12.23% | +9.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.30% | 5.03% | +0.27% |
Volatility
ZGLH.TO vs. CGL-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
BMO Gold Bullion Hedged to CAD ETF (ZGLH.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL-C.TO) have volatilities of 11.24% and 10.97%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| ZGLH.TO | CGL-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.24% | 10.97% | +0.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.59% | 23.21% | +0.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.19% | 26.21% | +0.98% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.13% | 16.73% | +5.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.13% | 15.49% | +6.64% |