ABFL vs. CLU.NEO
ABFL (Abacus FCF Leaders ETF) and CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ABFL is actively managed, while CLU.NEO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ABFL returned 12.77%/yr vs 6.28%/yr for CLU.NEO. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ABFL charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CLU.NEO.
Performance
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ABFL is traded in USD, while CLU.NEO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CLU.NEO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ABFL achieves a 17.63% return, which is significantly higher than CLU.NEO's 7.34% return.
ABFL
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 6.04%
- YTD
- 17.63%
- 6M
- 17.18%
- 1Y
- 20.72%
- 3Y*
- 19.01%
- 5Y*
- 12.77%
- 10Y*
- —
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- -0.54%
- YTD
- 7.34%
- 6M
- 10.67%
- 1Y
- 23.56%
- 3Y*
- 15.62%
- 5Y*
- 6.28%
- 10Y*
- 10.22%
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF | 17.63% | 8.07% | 18.26% | 22.97% | -14.60% | 30.66% | 18.30% | 26.03% | -6.26% | 15.23% |
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 7.34% | 20.72% | 5.75% | 15.70% | -15.43% | 32.09% | 5.65% | 31.68% | -18.06% | 10.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between ABFL and CLU.NEO is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2017 | 0.65 |
The correlation between ABFL and CLU.NEO shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.66 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
ABFL
CLU.NEO
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO). 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.
| ABFL | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.38 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.90 | 2.67 | +0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.41 | 10.24 | -0.83 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ABFL | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.36 | 2.04 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 | 0.35 | +0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 0.47 | +0.31 |
Drawdowns
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ABFL drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, smaller than the maximum CLU.NEO drawdown of -45.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABFL and CLU.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ABFL | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.95% | -45.80% | +10.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.17% | -8.87% | +1.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.92% | -18.06% | -1.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.88% | -27.75% | +5.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.80% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.35% | +1.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.99% | -8.55% | +3.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.21% | 2.31% | -0.10% |
Volatility
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Volatility Comparison
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) has a higher volatility of 4.48% compared to iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) at 2.43%. This indicates that ABFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLU.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ABFL | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.48% | 2.43% | +2.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.70% | 8.33% | +3.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.31% | 11.60% | +3.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.09% | 18.03% | -0.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.71% | 21.54% | -2.83% |
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ABFL has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than CLU.NEO's 0.72% expense ratio.
Dividends
ABFL vs. CLU.NEO - Dividend Comparison
ABFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than CLU.NEO's 1.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF | 0.53% | 0.62% | 0.70% | 0.94% | 1.36% | 9.63% | 0.41% | 0.72% | 0.62% | 0.40% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 1.20% | 1.31% | 1.32% | 1.35% | 1.63% | 1.19% | 1.66% | 1.46% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 1.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ABFL and CLU.NEO have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ABFL is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ABFL is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: Abacus and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ABFL and 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
Find the right allocation for ABFL and CLU.NEO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer