ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO
Compare and contrast key facts about BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity (CAD Hedged) (ZQQ.TO) and iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO).
ZQQ.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. ZQQ.TO is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index. It was launched on Jan 19, 2010. 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 ZQQ.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.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: ZQQ.TO or CGL.TO.
Key characteristics
| ZQQ.TO | CGL.TO | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 14.40% | 22.61% |
| 1Y Return | 26.28% | 30.52% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 7.13% | 12.10% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 18.93% | 9.69% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 16.44% | 6.50% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.46 | 2.10 |
| Daily Std Dev | 17.83% | 14.51% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.38% | -45.96% |
| Current Drawdown | -6.62% | -1.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZQQ.TO and CGL.TO is 0.36, 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.
Performance
ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, ZQQ.TO achieves a 14.40% return, which is significantly lower than CGL.TO's 22.61% return. Over the past 10 years, ZQQ.TO has outperformed CGL.TO with an annualized return of 16.44%, while CGL.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 6.50% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZQQ.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than CGL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity (CAD Hedged) (ZQQ.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.
Dividends
ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZQQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%, while CGL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZQQ.TO BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity (CAD Hedged) | 0.28% | 0.32% | 0.45% | 0.14% | 0.41% | 0.51% | 0.64% | 0.57% | 1.60% | 0.81% | 1.42% | 0.96% |
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
ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZQQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.38%, smaller than the maximum CGL.TO drawdown of -45.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZQQ.TO and CGL.TO. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
ZQQ.TO vs. CGL.TO - Volatility Comparison
BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity (CAD Hedged) (ZQQ.TO) has a higher volatility of 6.79% compared to iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CGL.TO) at 4.30%. This indicates that ZQQ.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.