ABIG vs. CLU.NEO
ABIG (Argent Large Cap ETF) and CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ABIG is actively managed, while CLU.NEO is passively managed. Over the past year, ABIG returned 18.99% vs 22.66% for CLU.NEO. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ABIG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CLU.NEO.
Performance
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ABIG 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
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ABIG having a 7.21% return and CLU.NEO slightly higher at 7.39%.
ABIG
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- 4.23%
- YTD
- 7.21%
- 6M
- 6.33%
- 1Y
- 18.99%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- -0.45%
- YTD
- 7.39%
- 6M
- 11.02%
- 1Y
- 22.66%
- 3Y*
- 15.64%
- 5Y*
- 6.29%
- 10Y*
- 10.23%
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ABIG Argent Large Cap ETF | 7.21% | 16.95% |
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 7.39% | 33.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between ABIG and CLU.NEO is 0.56, 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 | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2025 | 0.51 |
The correlation between ABIG and CLU.NEO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
ABIG
CLU.NEO
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Argent Large Cap ETF (ABIG) 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.
| ABIG | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.38 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.39 | 2.67 | -1.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.01 | 10.26 | -5.25 |
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
| ABIG | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.46 | 2.04 | -0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.53 | 0.47 | +1.06 |
Drawdowns
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ABIG drawdown since its inception was -13.70%, smaller than the maximum CLU.NEO drawdown of -45.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABIG and CLU.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ABIG | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.70% | -45.80% | +32.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.70% | -8.87% | -4.83% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.06% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.75% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.80% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.65% | -1.31% | +0.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -8.55% | +6.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.80% | 2.31% | +1.49% |
Volatility
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Volatility Comparison
Argent Large Cap ETF (ABIG) has a higher volatility of 3.37% compared to iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) at 2.42%. This indicates that ABIG'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
| ABIG | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.37% | 2.42% | +0.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.02% | 8.33% | +1.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.08% | 11.60% | +1.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.31% | 18.03% | -3.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.31% | 21.54% | -7.23% |
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ABIG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than CLU.NEO's 0.72% expense ratio.
Dividends
ABIG vs. CLU.NEO - Dividend Comparison
ABIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than CLU.NEO's 1.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ABIG Argent Large Cap ETF | 0.09% | 0.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
ABIG and CLU.NEO have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ABIG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ABIG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: Argent and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ABIG and 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
Find the right allocation for ABIG 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